...
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 >Outcome of Single-Bundle Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using the Anteromedial Versus the Transtibial Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
【24h】

Outcome of Single-Bundle Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using the Anteromedial Versus the Transtibial Technique: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

机译:单束Ham绳肌前交叉韧带重建的前路与经胫骨技术:系统评价和荟萃分析

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: To compare the clinical outcomes of single-bundle hamstring anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction between the anteromedial (AM) and transtibial (TT) techniques. Methods: We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the English-language literature in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for articles that compared clinical outcomes of AM versus TT ACL reconstruction. The outcome measures analyzed included postoperative Lachman test, pivot-shift test, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Lysholm scores. Results: We included 10 articles from an initial 308 abstracts for the systematic review and included 6 studies for the meta-analysis. The study population consisted of a total of 733 patients, of whom 366 (49.9%) underwent the AM technique and 367 (50.1%) underwent the TT technique for ACL reconstruction. For postoperative knee stability, the AM technique yielded superior results in terms of the proportion of negative Lachman test results (n = 243; odds ratio [OR], 2.98 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29 to 6.88]) and proportion of negative pivot- shift test results (n = 238; OR, 3.67 [95% CI, 1.80 to 7.52]). For postoperative functional status, the AM technique yielded superior results in terms of objective IKDC grading (proportion with IKDC grade A) (n = 269; OR, 2.19 [95% CI, 1.23 to 3.88]) but had comparable Lysholm scores (n = 478; mean difference, 1.43 [95% CI, 0.01 to 2.84]). Conclusions: Single- bundle hamstring ACL reconstruction using the AM technique showed superior surgeon- recorded stability according to the IKDC knee score, Lachman test, and pivot- shift test. However, there was no difference in patient-reported functional outcome (Lysholm score).
机译:目的:比较前束(AM)和胫骨(TT)技术之间的单束绳肌前交叉韧带(ACL)重建的临床结果。方法:我们对PubMed,Scopus,Web of Science和Cochrane对照试验中央注册数据库中的英语文献进行了全面的系统回顾和荟萃分析,比较了AM与TT ACL重建的临床结果。分析的结局指标包括术后Lachman测验,枢轴移位测验,国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)和Lysholm评分。结果:我们包括来自308个摘要的10篇文章,用于系统评价,包括6篇针对荟萃分析的研究。研究人群包括总共733例患者,其中366例(49.9%)接受了AM技术,而367例(50.1%)接受了TT技术进行ACL重建。对于术后膝关节稳定性,AM技术在Lachman阴性检查结果的比例(n = 243;优势比[OR],2.98 [95%置信区间(CI),1.29至6.88])和轴移测试结果为负(n = 238; OR,3.67 [95%CI,1.80至7.52])。对于术后功能状态,AM技术在客观IKDC分级(与IKDC等级A的比例)(n = 269; OR,2.19 [95%CI,1.23至3.88])方面产生了优异的结果,但Lysholm评分相当(n = 478;平均差异为1.43 [95%CI,0.01至2.84]。结论:根据IKDC膝关节评分,Lachman测试和枢轴移位测试,使用AM技术的单束绳肌ACL重建显示出优异的手术记录稳定性。但是,患者报告的功能结局(Lysholm评分)没有差异。

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