Minimally Invasive Decompression with Posterior Elements Preservation Versus Laminectomy and Fusion For Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Surgical, Clinical and Radiological Outcomes

Introduction: Chronic low back pain can be due to many different causes, including degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). For patients who do not respond to conservative management, surgery remains the most effective treatment. Open laminectomy alone and laminectomy and fusion (LF) for DS have been widely investigated, however, no meta-analyses have compared minimally invasive decompression with posterior elements preservation (MID) techniques and LF. Minimally invasive techniques might provide specific advantages that were not recognized in previous studies that pooled different decompression strategies together.

Materials And Methods: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, according to the PRISMA statement, of comparative studies reporting surgical, clinical and radiological outcomes of MID and LF for DS.

Results: A total of 3202 papers were screened and 7 were finally included in the meta-analysis. MID is associated with a shorter surgical duration and hospitalization stay, and a lower intraoperative blood loss and residual low back pain; however, the residual disability grade was lower in the LF group. Complication rates were similar between the two groups. The rate of adjacent segment degeneration was lower in the MID group, whereas data on radiological outcomes were heterogeneous and not suitable for data-pooling.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that MID might be considered as an effective alternative to LF for DS. Further clinical trials will be needed to confirm our results, better investigate radiological outcomes, and identify patient subgroups that may benefit the most from specific techniques.