A systematic review of studies on the diagnostics and classification system used in surgically treated, acute, isolated, unstable syndesmotic injury: a plea for uniform definition of syndesmotic injuries.

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Fabian Tobias Spindler, Wolfgang Böcker, Hans Polzer, Sebastian Felix Baumbach
{"title":"A systematic review of studies on the diagnostics and classification system used in surgically treated, acute, isolated, unstable syndesmotic injury: a plea for uniform definition of syndesmotic injuries.","authors":"Fabian Tobias Spindler, Wolfgang Böcker, Hans Polzer, Sebastian Felix Baumbach","doi":"10.1530/EOR-23-0097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To this day, diagnostic standards and uniform definition for acute, isolated syndesmotic injuries are missing. The aim of the current study was to conduct a systematic review of the classification systems and diagnostics currently applied and to propose a best evidence diagnostic approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase were searched from inception to June 5, 2022, for studies reporting the outcome of surgically treated acute, isolated syndesmotic injuries. First, all classifications used in the eligible studies were identified and illustrated according to the individual syndesmotic structures injured. Second, the indication for surgery and stabilization, based on the diagnostics applied and the time point assessed (pre- or intra-operatively), was analyzed, including the applied cutoff criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten out of 4190 studies, comprising 317 acute ligamentous syndesmotic injuries, met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies facilitated one of the three different classification systems (Calder, West Point, or Sikka classification). Eight studies based their indication for surgery on a combination of clinical and radiographic examinations and two on radiographs only. The most applied clinical tests were the external rotation stress test and squeeze test. The most common radiologic diagnostics were plain radiographs and MRI. Intraoperatively, instability was verified most commonly using arthroscopy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Current classifications and diagnostics for syndesmotic injuries are heterogeneous, often cannot be attributed to the ligaments injured. An evidence-based diagnostic algorithm based on noninvasive diagnostics and an anatomy-based classification for acute syndesmotic instability is presented.</p>","PeriodicalId":48598,"journal":{"name":"Efort Open Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10823566/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Efort Open Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1530/EOR-23-0097","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To this day, diagnostic standards and uniform definition for acute, isolated syndesmotic injuries are missing. The aim of the current study was to conduct a systematic review of the classification systems and diagnostics currently applied and to propose a best evidence diagnostic approach.

Methods: Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase were searched from inception to June 5, 2022, for studies reporting the outcome of surgically treated acute, isolated syndesmotic injuries. First, all classifications used in the eligible studies were identified and illustrated according to the individual syndesmotic structures injured. Second, the indication for surgery and stabilization, based on the diagnostics applied and the time point assessed (pre- or intra-operatively), was analyzed, including the applied cutoff criteria.

Results: Ten out of 4190 studies, comprising 317 acute ligamentous syndesmotic injuries, met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies facilitated one of the three different classification systems (Calder, West Point, or Sikka classification). Eight studies based their indication for surgery on a combination of clinical and radiographic examinations and two on radiographs only. The most applied clinical tests were the external rotation stress test and squeeze test. The most common radiologic diagnostics were plain radiographs and MRI. Intraoperatively, instability was verified most commonly using arthroscopy.

Conclusion: Current classifications and diagnostics for syndesmotic injuries are heterogeneous, often cannot be attributed to the ligaments injured. An evidence-based diagnostic algorithm based on noninvasive diagnostics and an anatomy-based classification for acute syndesmotic instability is presented.

对用于手术治疗、急性、孤立、不稳定巩膜损伤的诊断和分类系统的研究进行系统回顾:呼吁对巩膜损伤进行统一定义。
目的:时至今日,急性孤立性联合肌腱损伤的诊断标准和统一定义仍然缺失。本研究旨在对目前应用的分类系统和诊断方法进行系统性回顾,并提出最佳证据诊断方法:方法:检索了 Medline (PubMed)、Scopus、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 和 Embase 中从开始到 2022 年 6 月 5 日报告急性孤立性联合肌腱损伤手术治疗结果的研究。首先,对符合条件的研究中使用的所有分类进行了识别,并根据受伤的各个巩膜结构进行了说明。其次,根据应用的诊断方法和评估的时间点(术前或术中),分析了手术和稳定的适应症,包括应用的临界标准:结果:在 4190 项研究中,有 10 项符合纳入标准,包括 317 例急性韧带巩膜损伤。七项研究采用了三种不同分类系统(考尔德分类、西点分类或西卡分类)中的一种。八项研究根据临床和影像学检查相结合的方法确定手术指征,两项研究仅根据影像学检查确定手术指征。最常用的临床检查是外旋压力试验和挤压试验。最常见的放射学诊断是普通X光片和核磁共振成像。术中,最常用的是关节镜检查来验证不稳定性:结论:目前对韧带联合损伤的分类和诊断方法不尽相同,往往不能归因于损伤的韧带。本文介绍了一种基于无创诊断和解剖学分类的循证诊断算法,用于诊断急性韧带联合不稳定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Efort Open Reviews
Efort Open Reviews Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
2.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: EFORT Open Reviews publishes high-quality instructional review articles across the whole field of orthopaedics and traumatology. Commissioned, peer-reviewed articles from international experts summarize current knowledge and practice in orthopaedics, with the aim of providing systematic coverage of the field. All articles undergo rigorous scientific editing to ensure the highest standards of accuracy and clarity. This continuously published online journal is fully open access and will provide integrated CME. It is an authoritative resource for educating trainees and supports practising orthopaedic surgeons in keeping informed about the latest clinical and scientific advances. One print issue containing a selection of papers from the journal will be published each year to coincide with the EFORT Annual Congress. EFORT Open Reviews is the official journal of the European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (EFORT) and is published in partnership with The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信