Total ankle replacement versus ankle fusion for end-stage ankle arthritis: A meta-analysis

IF 1.6 4区 医学
Taiyi Li, Li Zhao, Yan Liu, Li Huang, Jin Zhu, Jie Xiong, Junfeng Pang, Lina Qin, Zonggui Huang, Yinglong Xu, Hai Dai
{"title":"Total ankle replacement versus ankle fusion for end-stage ankle arthritis: A meta-analysis","authors":"Taiyi Li, Li Zhao, Yan Liu, Li Huang, Jin Zhu, Jie Xiong, Junfeng Pang, Lina Qin, Zonggui Huang, Yinglong Xu, Hai Dai","doi":"10.1177/10225536241244825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis study aims to systematically review the efficacy and safety of total ankle replacement (TAR) and ankle fusion (AF) as treatment options for end-stage ankle arthritis.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted on data from multiple databases, including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Construction and Building Materials, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus for RCTs and prospective cohort studies comparing TAR and AF in patients with end-stage ankle arthritis from inception up to June, 2023. Our primary outcomes of interest included patients’ clinical function scores and complications. We employed Review Manager 5.4 and Stata/MP 14.0 software for the meta-analysis.ResultsOur analysis incorporated 13 comparative studies, including 11 prospective studies, one pilot RCT, and one RCT. The pooled results revealed no significant difference in postoperative Short Form-36 scores between the TAR and AF groups (MD = −1.19, 95% CI: −3.89 to 1.50, p = .39). However, the postoperative Foot and Ankle Ability Measure scores in the AF group were significantly higher than in the TAR group (MD = 8.30, 95% CI: 1.01–15.60, p = .03). There was no significant difference in postoperative complication rates between the TAR and AF groups (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.59 to 1.54, p = .85).ConclusionCurrently available evidence suggests no significant disparity in postoperative outcomes between TAR and AF. In the short term, TAR demonstrates better clinical scores than AF and lower complication rates. Conversely, in the long term, AF exhibits superior clinical scores and lower complication rates, although this difference is not statistically significant.","PeriodicalId":16608,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery","volume":"247 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10225536241244825","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeThis study aims to systematically review the efficacy and safety of total ankle replacement (TAR) and ankle fusion (AF) as treatment options for end-stage ankle arthritis.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted on data from multiple databases, including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Construction and Building Materials, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus for RCTs and prospective cohort studies comparing TAR and AF in patients with end-stage ankle arthritis from inception up to June, 2023. Our primary outcomes of interest included patients’ clinical function scores and complications. We employed Review Manager 5.4 and Stata/MP 14.0 software for the meta-analysis.ResultsOur analysis incorporated 13 comparative studies, including 11 prospective studies, one pilot RCT, and one RCT. The pooled results revealed no significant difference in postoperative Short Form-36 scores between the TAR and AF groups (MD = −1.19, 95% CI: −3.89 to 1.50, p = .39). However, the postoperative Foot and Ankle Ability Measure scores in the AF group were significantly higher than in the TAR group (MD = 8.30, 95% CI: 1.01–15.60, p = .03). There was no significant difference in postoperative complication rates between the TAR and AF groups (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.59 to 1.54, p = .85).ConclusionCurrently available evidence suggests no significant disparity in postoperative outcomes between TAR and AF. In the short term, TAR demonstrates better clinical scores than AF and lower complication rates. Conversely, in the long term, AF exhibits superior clinical scores and lower complication rates, although this difference is not statistically significant.
全踝关节置换术与踝关节融合术治疗终末期踝关节炎:荟萃分析
目的 本研究旨在系统回顾全踝关节置换术(TAR)和踝关节融合术(AF)作为终末期踝关节炎治疗方案的有效性和安全性。方法 对多个数据库的数据进行了全面的文献检索,包括PubMed、The Cochrane Library、Construction and Building Materials、Embase、Web of Science和Scopus,以了解从开始到2023年6月对终末期踝关节炎患者进行TAR和AF比较的RCT和前瞻性队列研究。我们关注的主要结果包括患者的临床功能评分和并发症。我们采用了 Review Manager 5.4 和 Stata/MP 14.0 软件进行荟萃分析。结果我们的分析纳入了 13 项比较研究,包括 11 项前瞻性研究、1 项试验性 RCT 和 1 项 RCT。汇总结果显示,TAR 组和 AF 组的术后 Short Form-36 评分无明显差异(MD = -1.19, 95% CI: -3.89 to 1.50, p = .39)。然而,AF 组的术后足踝能力测量评分明显高于 TAR 组(MD = 8.30,95% CI:1.01-15.60,p = .03)。TAR 组和 AF 组的术后并发症发生率无明显差异(RR = 0.95,95% CI:0.59 至 1.54,p = .85)。短期来看,TAR 的临床评分优于 AF,并发症发生率也较低。相反,从长期来看,AF 的临床评分更高,并发症发生率更低,尽管这种差异在统计学上并不显著。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery is an open access peer-reviewed journal publishing original reviews and research articles on all aspects of orthopaedic surgery. It is the official journal of the Asia Pacific Orthopaedic Association. The journal welcomes and will publish materials of a diverse nature, from basic science research to clinical trials and surgical techniques. The journal encourages contributions from all parts of the world, but special emphasis is given to research of particular relevance to the Asia Pacific region.
×
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