...
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 >Do Arthroscopic and Open Stabilization Techniques Restore Equivalent Stability to the Shoulder in the Setting of Anterior Glenohumeral Instability? A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-analyses
【24h】

Do Arthroscopic and Open Stabilization Techniques Restore Equivalent Stability to the Shoulder in the Setting of Anterior Glenohumeral Instability? A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-analyses

机译:关节镜和开放稳定技术是否可以在前盂唇肱骨不稳定的情况下恢复肩部的等效稳定性?重叠荟萃分析的系统评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Purpose: Shoulder instability frequently recurs in young patients without operative treatment. Both open and arthroscopic approaches to shoulder stabilization with labral repair and capsulorrhaphy have been described and are routinely used. Multiple trials have been conducted to compare these approaches, with multiple meta-analyses performed to synthesize these trials; however, the results remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to critically evaluate the current meta-analyses to identify the current state of the art. Methods: In this study we evaluate available scientific support for the ability of both arthroscopic and open soft-tissue stabilization techniques to restore stability of the shoulder by performing a systematic review of the literature for previous meta-analyses. Data were extracted for rates of recurrence and patient outcomes. Study quality was measured with the Oxman-Guyatt and QUOROM (Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses) systems. The Jadad algorithm was applied independently by 4 authors to determine which meta-analysis provided the highest level of available evidence. Results: After application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 8 meta-analyses were included. Both studies published prior to 2007 concluded that open stabilization provided lower recurrence rates than arthroscopic stabilization, the 3 studies published in 2007 are discordant, and all 3 studies published after 2008 concluded that open and arthroscopic stabilization provided equivalent results. Two meta-analyses had low Oxman-Guyatt scores (< 3) signifying major flaws. Four authors independently selected the same meta-analysis as providing the highest quality of evidence using the Jadad algorithm, and this meta-analysis found no difference in recurrence rates between open and arthroscopic stabilization. Conclusions: This systematic review of overlapping metaanalyses comparing arthroscopic and open shoulder stabilization suggests that according to current best available evidence, there are no significant differences in failure rates.
机译:目的:未经手术治疗的年轻患者经常会出现肩部不稳。开放式和关节镜下通过唇部修复和囊膜固定来稳定肩膀的方法均已得到描述,并已得到常规使用。已经进行了多次试验以比较这些方法,并进行了多次荟萃分析以综合这些试验。但是,结果仍然存在争议。这项研究的目的是严格评估当前的荟萃分析,以识别当前的技术水平。方法:在这项研究中,我们评估了对关节镜和开放式软组织稳定技术通过恢复以前的荟萃分析文献的系统评价来恢复肩膀稳定性的能力的科学支持。提取有关复发率和患者预后的数据。研究质量通过Oxman-Guyatt和QUOROM(荟萃分析报告质量)系统进行测量。 Jadad算法由4位作者独立应用,以确定哪种荟萃分析提供了最高水平的可用证据。结果:应用纳入和排除标准后,纳入了8项荟萃分析。 2007年之前发表的两项研究均得出结论,开放稳定术的复发率低于关节镜稳定术,2007年发表的3项研究结果不一致,而2008年之后发表的所有3项研究得出的结论是开放性和关节镜稳定术提供了相同的结果。两次荟萃分析的Oxman-Guyatt评分较低(<3),表明存在重大缺陷。四名作者独立选择了相同的荟萃分析,以使用Jadad算法提供最高质量的证据,该荟萃分析发现开放性和关节镜稳定性之间的复发率没有差异。结论:对关节镜和肩关节稳定进行比较的重叠荟萃分析的系统综述表明,根据目前可获得的最佳证据,失败率没有显着差异。

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