Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects of minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain through a meta-analysis. Methods The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were comprehen...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kai Xu, Ya-Ling Li, Song-Hua Xiao, Yong-Wei Pan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2025-02-01
Series:Journal of International Medical Research
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605251315300
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1825206325608448000
author Kai Xu
Ya-Ling Li
Song-Hua Xiao
Yong-Wei Pan
author_facet Kai Xu
Ya-Ling Li
Song-Hua Xiao
Yong-Wei Pan
author_sort Kai Xu
collection DOAJ
description Objective This study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects of minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain through a meta-analysis. Methods The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were comprehensively searched for studies up to 31 August 2024. Relevant studies using lateral, posterior, and posterolateral approaches were identified. Pooled outcomes and publication bias were assessed. The study was registered with PROSPERO (registration No. CRD42023451047) Results A total of 48 studies were included: 32 focused on the lateral approach, 10 on the posterior approach, four on the posterolateral approach, and two compared the lateral and posterolateral approaches. The pooled effect analysis showed statistically significant improvements in the visual analog scale (VAS) scores for all three approaches at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Although no between-approach comparisons were conducted, the pooled improvements in VAS scores at 6 and 12 months postoperatively were numerically similar across all three approaches, as were the pooled fusion rates. The pooled complication rate for the lateral approach was 9.2%, numerically higher than 1% for the posterior approach. The pooled revision rate for the lateral approach was 2.4%, also numerically higher than 0.6% for the posterior approach. Conclusions Although pain relief and fusion rates were similar across all approaches, the lateral approach might be associated with a higher risk of total complications and revision surgery.
format Article
id doaj-art-afa8b3a345e240b9b656b532a03afc18
institution Kabale University
issn 1473-2300
language English
publishDate 2025-02-01
publisher SAGE Publishing
record_format Article
series Journal of International Medical Research
spelling doaj-art-afa8b3a345e240b9b656b532a03afc182025-02-07T11:03:20ZengSAGE PublishingJournal of International Medical Research1473-23002025-02-015310.1177/03000605251315300Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysisKai XuYa-Ling LiSong-Hua XiaoYong-Wei PanObjective This study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects of minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain through a meta-analysis. Methods The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were comprehensively searched for studies up to 31 August 2024. Relevant studies using lateral, posterior, and posterolateral approaches were identified. Pooled outcomes and publication bias were assessed. The study was registered with PROSPERO (registration No. CRD42023451047) Results A total of 48 studies were included: 32 focused on the lateral approach, 10 on the posterior approach, four on the posterolateral approach, and two compared the lateral and posterolateral approaches. The pooled effect analysis showed statistically significant improvements in the visual analog scale (VAS) scores for all three approaches at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Although no between-approach comparisons were conducted, the pooled improvements in VAS scores at 6 and 12 months postoperatively were numerically similar across all three approaches, as were the pooled fusion rates. The pooled complication rate for the lateral approach was 9.2%, numerically higher than 1% for the posterior approach. The pooled revision rate for the lateral approach was 2.4%, also numerically higher than 0.6% for the posterior approach. Conclusions Although pain relief and fusion rates were similar across all approaches, the lateral approach might be associated with a higher risk of total complications and revision surgery.https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605251315300
spellingShingle Kai Xu
Ya-Ling Li
Song-Hua Xiao
Yong-Wei Pan
Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Journal of International Medical Research
title Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort minimally invasive lateral posterior and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain a systematic review and meta analysis
url https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605251315300
work_keys_str_mv AT kaixu minimallyinvasivelateralposteriorandposterolateralsacroiliacjointfusionforlowbackpainasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yalingli minimallyinvasivelateralposteriorandposterolateralsacroiliacjointfusionforlowbackpainasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT songhuaxiao minimallyinvasivelateralposteriorandposterolateralsacroiliacjointfusionforlowbackpainasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yongweipan minimallyinvasivelateralposteriorandposterolateralsacroiliacjointfusionforlowbackpainasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis