4.89; I 2 =0%; 2 studies), complications (RR=0.37; 95%CI: 0.21, 0.65; I 2 = 0%; 2 studies), blood loss (mean difference= -1634.9ml; 95% CI: -2242.2ml, -1027.5ml; I 2 = 0%; 3 studies), and visual analogue scale (mean difference= -0.78; 95% CI: -1.50, -0.03; I 2 = 0%; 3 studies). Infection risk (RR=0.40; 95%CI: 0.09, 1.69; I 2 =0%; 2 studies), favorable change in cobb angle (mean difference= -0.38; 95% CI: -3.19, 2.43; I 2 =90.6%; 3 studies), and Oswestry Disability Index (mean difference= -3.45; 95% CI: -8.35, 1.45; I 2 =0%; 3 studies) were not significantly different between surgery types. Conclusions: Following a comprehensive pooling of the literature, this meta-analysis demonstrated that MIS was associated with better health and safety outcomes in adult patients with adult degenerative scoliosis compared to OS. Further studies are needed to allow for subgroup analyses and identification of specific patient populations who may benefit the most from MIS vs OS.

No abstract

No abstract