...
首页> 外文期刊>Arthroscopy: the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association >Acetabular Labral Debridement/Segmental Resection Versus Reconstruction in the Comprehensive Treatment of Symptomatic Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review
【24h】

Acetabular Labral Debridement/Segmental Resection Versus Reconstruction in the Comprehensive Treatment of Symptomatic Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review

机译:髋臼的上唇的清创术/节段切除与全面的重建治疗症状Femoroacetabular冲击:系统回顾

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: To perform a systematic review comparing outcomes of labral debridement/segmental resection with labral reconstruction as part of a comprehensive treatment strategy for femoroacetabular impingement. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to established PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metaanalyses) guidelines using defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The study groups were divided into labral debridement/ segmental resection (group 1) and labral reconstruction (group 2). Multiple search engines were queried (PubMed, Medline) for this analysis. Results: After an exhaustive search of the available literature, 20 publications were included. Twelve studies explored outcomes after labral debridement/resection in a total of 400 hips, whereas 7 studies reported on outcomes after labral reconstruction in a total of 275 hips. One additional matched-pair control study compared labral resection (22 hips) with reconstruction (11 hips). The surgical intervention was a revision in 0% to 100% for group 1 versus 5% to 55% for group 2. A direct anterior approach was not performed in group 2, and cam-type impingement appeared to make up a larger percentage of group 1. The Tonnis grade ranged from 0 to 1 for group 1 versus 0.3 to 1.1 for group 2. Joint replacements were performed in 0% to 30% and 0% to 25%, respectively. The modified Harris Hip Score was the most widely used patient-reported outcome measure and suggested that labral reconstruction was not inferior to labral debridement/segmental resection. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes after labral debridement/segmental resection versus labral reconstruction were found to be comparable. In the setting of unsalvageable labral pathology, labral reconstruction was used more frequently as a revision option whereas debridement may be more commonly used in the index setting.
机译:目的:进行系统回顾比较上唇的清创术/节段性的结果与上唇的切除重建的一部分综合治疗策略femoroacetabular撞击。系统评价是根据进行的建立了棱镜(首选报告项目系统评价和Metaanalyses)的指导方针使用定义的纳入和排除标准。学习小组是分为上唇的清创术/节段切除(组1)和上唇的重建(组2)。多个搜索查询引擎(PubMed Medline)分析。可用的文学,20出版物包括在内。在400年总共上唇的清创术/切除臀部,而7项研究报告的结果之后在275年的上唇的重建臀部。相比上唇的切除(22臀部)重建(11臀部)。干预是修订在0%到100%组1组2和5%至55%。前的方法并不是表现在2组,和凸轮式冲击似乎组成组1的比例更大。范围从0到1组1和0.3到1.1组2。分别0%到30%和0%到25%。修改Harris髋关节评分是最广泛的使用patient-reported测量和结果建议上唇的重建不是低于to labral debridement / segmental切除。上唇的清创术/节段切除和上唇的重建被发现具有可比性。上唇的病理学、上唇的重建而更频繁修改选项清创术可能更常用指标设置。

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