Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

7 김다현 김영문 김인겸 이동렬 이준원 임창진 정상훈 책임교수 엄상화. Comparison between MD and MED in VAS, MacNab and complications: Meta-analysis.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "7 김다현 김영문 김인겸 이동렬 이준원 임창진 정상훈 책임교수 엄상화. Comparison between MD and MED in VAS, MacNab and complications: Meta-analysis."— Presentation transcript:

1 7 김다현 김영문 김인겸 이동렬 이준원 임창진 정상훈 책임교수 엄상화

2 Comparison between MD and MED in VAS, MacNab and complications: Meta-analysis

3

4 7 김다현 김영문 김인겸 이동렬 이준원 임창진 정상훈 책임교수 엄상화

5 Comparison between MD and MED in VAS, MacNab and complications: Meta-analysis

6 80% Life-time prevalence of back pain

7 Herniated intervertebral disc Most common in lumbar lesion

8 Lumbar Discectomy No response to conservative Tx. for 6wks Early, progressive neurologic symptom Microsugical discectomy (MD) Microendoscopic discectomy (MED)

9 MD vs MED MD Standard Short op. time Wide indication (?) MED Fast tissue recovery Short hospital stay Less Postop. pain

10 Meta-analysis

11 Method

12 Search strategy JAMA & Archives PubMed MEDLINE EMBASE Ovid English January, 2000 ~ September, 2010

13 Selection of keywords Technical Procedure Anatomical features / pathology Diskectomy Discectomy Open discectomy Lumbar discectomy Endoscopic discectomy Microendoscopic discectomy Percutaneous endoscopic discectomy Minimally invasive technique Sciatica Back pain Low back pain Disk Disc Lumbar disc Lumbar herniated inter- vertebral disc

14 Selection of studies Inclusion CriteriaExclusion Criteria Patient selection Conservative Tx. at least 4wks Early, progressive neurologic symptoms Intolerable pain Single lesion (?) Measure instrument VAS MacNab Complications Recurrence Other vertebral disease? History of vertebral op.?

15 Quality assessment Type of studies – Prospective, clinical trial – Retrospective + cohort – Retrospective Journal grade? – JAMA, NEJM, Lancet – SCI – Domestic, etc : 1 point : 0.8 point : 0.6 point : 1 point : 0.8 point : 0.6 point

16 Data analysis? ( 분석방법 ) Tools – Excel 2007, RASW statistics 18, MedCalc 평균치검정 ? – VAS 교차분석 ? – MacNab – Complications

17 Result

18 8 9 1010 VAS MacNab Complications

19 82 15 VAS 8 Macnab 9 합병증 10 FromTo

20 VAS Baby one more time.

21 MacNab p-value = 0.001

22 Complications p-value = 0.962 OR(MED/MD) = 1.010 (95% CI 0.67 – 1.51)

23 Conclusion

24 논문이 끝났다는 것이지.

25 Discussion

26 회식은 구제역으로 어려움에 처한 축산농 가를 살리기 위해서 돼지고기가 좋겠다는 게 개인적인 의견이라능 …


Download ppt "7 김다현 김영문 김인겸 이동렬 이준원 임창진 정상훈 책임교수 엄상화. Comparison between MD and MED in VAS, MacNab and complications: Meta-analysis."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google