首页> 外文期刊>Plastic and reconstructive surgery >Surgical treatment of osteoarthritis of the carpometacarpal joint of the thumb: a systematic review.
【24h】

Surgical treatment of osteoarthritis of the carpometacarpal joint of the thumb: a systematic review.

机译:拇指腕掌关节骨关节炎的外科治疗:系统评价。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

In most cases of basal joint osteoarthritis, surgery becomes an option at stages II, III, and IV, as classified by Eaton. Controversy exists regarding which technique achieves the best outcome. This systematic review was undertaken to address the question of which technique, if any, offers the best outcome to patients with osteoarthritis of the first carpometacarpal joint greater than stage II. A thorough search of the electronic databases Cochrane, Cinahl, Healthstar, and MEDLINE/PubMed was undertaken to identify reviews and articles on primary comparative studies of the different surgical options. The methodological quality of the retrieved articles was assessed on the basis of specific criteria. Inclusion criteria were applied to 44 of 254 possibly relevant articles. Eight reviews and 18 comparative studies met the criteria and were reviewed. Each of the techniques, arthrodesis, trapeziectomy with or without biological/synthetic interposition, osteotomy, and joint replacement, was associated with unique benefits and risks. There was great variability in outcome measurements. The majority of retrieved review articles claim that ligamentous reconstruction and tendon interposition may represent the best option; however, validity assessment of these studies revealed methodological flaws. Furthermore, results from the articles on comparative studies indicate that ligamentous reconstruction and tendon interposition may provide no additional benefit when compared with arthrodesis and trapeziectomy alone or with tendon interposition. There is no consensus as to which clinical outcomes are most important in thumb basal joint surgery and how these should be measured. This renders the appraisal and comparison of such studies a challenging task. Until large randomized controlled trials that compare techniques in similar populations with respect to staging and prognostic factors are undertaken and the clinical outcomes are clearly defined, surgeons will continue to claim superiority of one technique over another without supporting evidence.
机译:根据伊顿的分类,在大多数基底关节骨关节炎的病例中,手术在II,III和IV期成为一种选择。关于哪种技术可以达到最佳结果存在争议。进行了这项系统的审查,以探讨哪种技术(如果有的话)可以为比第二阶段更大的第一腕掌关节的骨关节炎患者提供最佳结果。对电子数据库Cochrane,Cinahl,Healthstar和MEDLINE / PubMed进行了全面搜索,以鉴定有关不同手术方案的主要比较研究的评论和文章。根据特定标准评估检索到的物品的方法学质量。纳入标准应用于254条可能相关的文章中的44条。八项审查和18项比较研究符合标准并进行了审查。每种技术,关节固定术,有或没有生物/合成介入的梯形切除术,截骨术和关节置换术都具有独特的益处和风险。结局指标差异很大。检索到的大多数评论文章都认为,韧带重建和腱插入可能是最好的选择。然而,对这些研究的有效性评估发现了方法上的缺陷。此外,比较研究文章的结果表明,与单独进行关节固定术和梯形切除术或与肌腱插入术相比,韧带重建和肌腱插入术可能没有额外的益处。关于哪些临床结果在拇指基底关节手术中最重要以及如何进行测量尚无共识。这使得对此类研究的评估和比较是一项艰巨的任务。除非进行比较相似人群在分期和预后因素方面的技术的大型随机对照试验,并明确定义临床结果,否则在没有证据支持的情况下,外科医生将继续声称一种技术优于另一种技术。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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