Laminectomy Versus Laminectomy with Fusion for Intradural Extramedullary Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The primary objective of our systematic review and meta-analysis was to systematically compare the reported outcomes between laminectomy and laminectomy with fixation/fusion (LF) for the treatment of intradural extramedullary tumors (IDEMTs). Our secondary objective was to compare the outcomes between different laminectomy exposure techniques. PubMed and Embase were queried for literature on laminectomy and LF for IDEMTs. Reports of transforaminal approaches, interlaminar approaches, corpectomy, pediatrics patients, intramedullary tumors, technical studies, animal or cadaver studies, and literature reviews were excluded. The outcome measures recorded were pain, neurologic function, functional independence, cerebrospinal fluid leak, and wound infection. Where possible, the laminectomy technique (partial laminectomy [PL] vs. total laminectomy [TL]) was specified. Stata, version 17, was used for the fixed effects inverse variance meta-analysis. Of 1849 reports assessed, 17 were included. The meta-analysis revealed that laminectomy (PL or TL) resulted in higher rates of postoperative sagittal instability compared with LF (odds ratio, 1.81; P < 0.001). No differences in any other postoperative outcome were observed between laminectomy and LF ( P = 0.44). The systematic review also revealed no differences in postoperative pain, neurologic function, or functional independence or disability between PL and TL. Some evidence suggested that TL might result in greater rates of sagittal instability compared with PL. No differences between LF, PL, or TL in pain, neurologic deficit, functional independence, cerebrospinal fluid leak, or wound infection were reported. Laminectomy had greater odds of sagittal instability compared with LF. Patients with preoperative sagittal instability requiring extensive removal of the posterior spinal column to achieve adequate resection of large tumors might benefit from LF.