Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: Several surgical options for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are available, but current guidelines do not recommend which one should be prioritized. Although previous network meta-analyses (NMAs) have been performed on this topic, they have major methodological problems and could not provide the convincing evidence and clinical practical information required. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing at least two surgical interventions were included by searching AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE (inception to August 2023). A frequentist random-effects NMA was performed for physical function and adverse events due to any reason. For physical function, three follow-up time points were included: short-term (

Original publication

DOI

10.1186/s12916-024-03653-z

Type

Journal article

Journal

Bmc med

Publication Date

08/10/2024

Volume

22

Keywords

Lumbar spinal stenosis, Musculoskeletal disease, Network meta-analysis, Orthopaedics, Surgery, Systematic review, Humans, Laminectomy, Lumbar Vertebrae, Network Meta-Analysis, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Spinal Stenosis, Treatment Outcome