Outcomes and adverse events for spinal synovial cysts surgical treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Spinal synovial cysts (SSCs) are a rare cause of nerve root and spinal cord compression. Surgical excision of SSCs remains the mainstay of treatment in the presence of unremitting symptoms or neurological deficits, but the choice of the surgical approach remains controversial. The goal of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and adverse events associated with traditional approaches (interlaminar or laminectomy/hemilaminectomy) and minimally invasive approaches (microsurgical tubular approaches or endoscopic approaches) for SSCs.

Studies reporting surgical management of SSCs were searched in three online databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science). This meta-analysis was reported following the PRISMA Statement. It was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021288992). The Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias in Nonrandomised Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) was used to evaluate bias. Extracted research data were statistically analyzed using Stata 16 and SPSS statistics 25.

A total of 22 related relevant studies were included. Meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in dural tear, residual cyst, recurrence, reoperation, and operation time between minimally invasive approaches and traditional approaches (p > 0.05), but minimally invasive approaches had a good functional improvement (p = 0.004). Postoperative length of hospital stays and intraoperative bleeding in traditional approaches were also higher than in minimally invasive approaches (p < 0.05).

Based on the available evidence, minimally invasive approaches may be better than traditional approaches in the treatment of SSCs. Minimally invasive approaches had the advantages of improving clinical satisfaction, with a similar complication rate to traditional approaches. Moreover, endoscopic and microsurgical tubular approaches had similar outcomes.