Both unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation are effective for lumbar spinal fusion—A meta-analysis-based systematic review

SummaryA series of studies have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar spinal fusion, but there is still controversy about which one is more superior. We performed a meta-analysis to more accurately estimate the effectiveness of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar spinal fusion. Studies on the comparison between unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar spinal fusion were identified from PubMed, SpringerLink, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the Wanfang database and the China Biology Medical literature database (CBM) and related references were searched. The included trials were screened according to the criteria of inclusion and exclusion. The quality of included trials was evaluated. Data were extracted by two reviewers independently. RevMan 5.1.1 was used for data analysis. The fixed or random effect model was selected based on the heterogeneity test among studies evaluated using the I2 statistic. A total of nine studies involving 567 patients were included in the analyses for the effectiveness of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar spinal fusion. Unilateral pedicle screw fixation was performed in 287 patients and bilateral pedicle screw fixation in 280 patients. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that statistically significant differences were observed between the two fixation procedures with regard to mean operation time and amount of bleeding. There were no differences in hospitalisation days, fusion rate, complication rate, and excellent and good rates. This meta-analysis suggested that both unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation are effective in one or two segmental lumbar spinal fusion. In comparison with bilateral fixation, unilateral fixation can shorten the operation time, reduce the amount of bleeding, and reduce medical expenses. There were similar effects with regard to hospitalisation days, fusion rate, complication rate, and excellent and good rates.