Search

ObjectiveInconsistent findings in regard to association between different concentrations of vitamin D, calcium or their combination and the risk of fracture have been reported during the past decade in community-dwelling older people. This study was designed to compare the fracture risk using different concentrations of vitamin D, calcium or their combination.DesignA systematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesRandomised controlled trials in PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase databases were systematically searched from the inception dates to 31 December 2017.OutcomesTotal fracture was defined as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were hip fracture and vertebral fracture. Due to the consistency of the original studies, a consistency model was adopted.ResultsA total of 25 randomised controlled trials involving 43 510 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. There was no evidence that the risk of total fracture was reduced using different concentrations of vitamin D, calcium or their combination compared with placebo or no treatment. No significant associations were found between calcium, vitamin D, or combined calcium and vitamin D supplements and the incidence of hip or vertebral fractures.ConclusionsThe use of supplements that included calcium, vitamin D or both was not found to be better than placebo or no treatment in terms of risk of fractures among community-dwelling older adults. It means the routine use of these supplements in community-dwelling older people should be treated more carefully.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017079624.

IntroductionThe optimal treatment for burst fractures of the thoracolumbar spine is controversial. The addition of screws in the fractured segment has been shown to improve construct stiffness, but can aggravate the trauma to the fractured vertebra. Therefore, optimised placement of two pedicle screws at the fracture level is required for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures. This randomised controlled study is the first to examine the efficacy of diverse orders of pedicle screw placement and will provide recommendations for the treatment of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures.Methods and analysisA randomised controlled trial with blinding of patients and the statistician, but not the clinicians and researchers, will be conducted. A total of 70 patients with single AO type A3 or A4 thoracolumbar fractures who are candidates for application of short-segment pedicle screws at the fractured vertebral level will be allocated randomly to the distraction-screw and screw-distraction groups at a ratio of 1:1. The primary clinical outcome measures will be the percentage loss of vertebral body height, screw depth in the injured vertebrae and kyphosis (Cobb angle). Secondary clinical outcome measures will be complications, Visual Analogue Scale scores for back and leg pain, neurological function, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, Japanese Orthopaedic Association score and Oswestry Disability Index. These parameters will be evaluated preoperatively, intraoperatively, on postoperative day 3, and at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively.Ethics and disseminationThe Institutional Review Board of the Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children’s Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University have reviewed and approved this study (batch: LCKY2018-05). The results will be presented in peer-reviewed journals and at an international spine-related meeting after completion of the study.Trial registration numberNCT03384368; Pre-results.

Introduction The incidence of lumbar disc degeneration disease has increased in recent years. Lumbar interbody fusion using two unilateral pedicle screws and a translaminar facet screw fixation has advantages of minimal invasiveness and lower costs compared with the traditional methods. Moreover, a method guided by a three-dimensional (3D) navigation template may help us improve the surgical accuracy and the success rate. This is the first randomised study using a 3D navigation template to guide a unilateral lumbar pedicle screw with contralateral translaminar facet screw fixation. Methods and analysis Patients who meet the criteria of the surgery will be randomly divided into experimental groups and control groups by a computer-generated randomisation schedule. We will preoperatively design an individual 3D navigation template using CATIA software and MeditoolCreate. The following primary outcomes will be collected: screw angles compared with the optimal screw trajectories in 3D digital images, length of the wound incision, operative time, intraoperative blood loss and complications. The following secondary outcomes will be collected: visual analogue scale (VAS) for back pain, VAS for leg pain and the Oswestry Disability Index. These parameters will be evaluated on day 1 and then 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Ethics and dissemination The study has been reviewed and approved by the institutional ethics review board of the Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children’s Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University. The results will be presented at scientific communities and peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number ChiCTR-IDR-17010466

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for treating two-adjacent-level cervical spondylosis myelopathy (CSM). Design A meta-analysis of the two anterior fusion methods was conducted. The electronic databases of PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ScienceDirect, CNKI, WANFANG DATA and CQVIP were searched. Quality assessment of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies criteria. Pooled risk ratios of dichotomous outcomes and standardised mean differences (SMDs) of continuous outcomes were generated. Using the χ2 and I2 tests, the statistical heterogeneity was assessed. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed. Participants Nine eligible trials with a total of 631 patients and a male-to-female ratio of 1.38:1 were included in this meta-analysis. Inclusion criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials that adopted ACCF and ACDF to treat two-adjacent-level CSM were included. Results No significant differences were identified between the two groups regarding hospital stay, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for neck and arm pain, total cervical range of motion (ROM), fusion ROM, fusion rate, adjacent-level ossification and complications, while ACDF had significantly less bleeding (SMD=1.14, 95% CI (0.74 to 1.53)); a shorter operation time (SMD=1.13, 95% CI (0.82 to 1.45)); greater cervical lordosis, total cervical (SMD=−2.95, 95% CI (−4.79 to −1.12)) and fused segment (SMD=−2.24, 95% CI (−3.31 to −1.17)); higher segmental height (SMD=−0.68, 95% CI (−1.03 to −0.34)) and less graft subsidence (SMD=0.40, 95% CI (0.06 to 0.75)) compared to ACCF. Conclusions The results suggested that ACDF has more advantages compared to ACCF. However, additional high-quality RCTs and a longer follow-up duration are needed.