...
首页> 外文期刊>Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine >Clinical and Radiological Outcomes After Autologous Matrix-Induced Chondrogenesis Versus Microfracture of the Knee: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up
【24h】

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes After Autologous Matrix-Induced Chondrogenesis Versus Microfracture of the Knee: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

机译:自体基质诱导的软骨发生后的临床和放射性结果与膝关节的微磨损:系统评价和META分析,最短为期两年

获取原文

摘要

Background: Microfracture (MFx) is the most common procedure for treating chondral lesions in the knee; however, initial improvements decline after 2 years. Autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) may overcome this shortcoming by combining MFx with collagen scaffolds. However, the outcomes of AMIC and MFx in the knee have not been compared. Purpose: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of AMIC and MFx over a minimum 2-year follow-up. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases identified studies of patients who underwent AMIC or MFx and that reported validated clinical outcome measure and/or radiological evaluation findings at a follow-up of ≥2 years. There were 2 reviewers who performed study selection, a risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. Results: Overall, 29 studies were included in this systematic review. The mean improvement on the Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, and visual analog scale for pain did not differ significantly between the 2 procedures. The mean improvement on the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score was significantly greater in the AMIC (45.9 [95% CI, 36.2-55.5]) than in the MFx (27.2 [95% CI, 23.3-31.1]) group ( P & .001). In addition, the mean magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue score was significantly higher in the AMIC (69.3 [95% CI, 55.1-83.5]) versus MFx (41.0 [95% CI, 27.3-54.7]) group ( P = .005), and the mean adequate defect filling rate on magnetic resonance imaging scans was significantly better in the AMIC (77.3% [95% CI, 66.7%-87.9%]) versus MFx (47.9% [95% CI, 29.2%-66.6%]) group ( P = .008) (odds ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.07-2.33]). Conclusion: No significant differences in clinical outcomes, except for the IKDC subjective score, were found between the AMIC and MFx groups. Greater improvement in IKDC subjective scores and magnetic resonance imaging findings were seen in patients treated with AMIC compared with MFx at a minimum 2-year follow-up.
机译:背景:微折衷(MFX)是治疗膝盖内骨性病变的最常见程序;但是,2年后初步改善下降。通过将MFX与胶原蛋白支架组合来克服自体基质诱导的软骨发生(AMIC)可以克服这种缺点。但是,膝关节中的AMIC和MFX的结果尚未进行比较。目的:将AMIC和MFX的临床和放射性结果进行比较至少为期2年的随访。研究设计:系统评价;证据级别,4.方法:系统地搜索Medline,Embase和Cochrane库数据库,确定了接受AMIC或MFX的患者的研究,并且报告了≥的后续随访验证的临床结果测量和/或放射学评估结果。 2年。有2名审查员进行了学习选择,偏见评估的风险和数据提取。结果:总体而言,该系统审查中包括29项研究。 Lysholm评分的平均改善,TEGNER活动量表和疼痛的视觉模拟规模在2个程序之间没有显着差异。国际膝关节文件(IKDC)主观评分的平均改善在AMIC中显着大于MFX(27.2 [95%CI,23.3-31.1])组( P& .001)。此外,AMIC的软骨修复组织评分的平均磁共振观察(69.3 [95%CI,55.1-83.5])与MFX(41.0 [95%[95%CI,27.3-54.7])组(P =。 005),在磁共振成像扫描上的平均缺陷填充率在AMIC中显着更好(77.3%[95%CI,66.7%-87.9%]),而MFX(47.9%[95%CI,29.2%-66.6 %])组(P = .008)(差距,1.58 [95%CI,1.07-2.33])。结论:在AMIC和MFX组之间发现了IKDC主观评分除外临床结果的显着差异。与MFX相比,IKDC主观评分和磁共振成像结果的更高提高了与MFX相比至少为期2年的随访。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号