Early Compared with Delayed Reconstruction in Multiligament Knee Injury: A Retrospective Propensity Analysis.

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Graeme Hoit, Jaskarndip Chahal, Ryan Khan, Matthew Rubacha, Aaron Nauth, Daniel B Whelan
{"title":"Early Compared with Delayed Reconstruction in Multiligament Knee Injury: A Retrospective Propensity Analysis.","authors":"Graeme Hoit, Jaskarndip Chahal, Ryan Khan, Matthew Rubacha, Aaron Nauth, Daniel B Whelan","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.23.00795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes following early compared with delayed reconstruction in patients with multiligament knee injury (MLKI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort analysis of patients with MLKI from 2007 to 2019 was conducted. Patients who underwent a reconstructive surgical procedure with ≥12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. Patients were stratified into early reconstruction (<6 weeks after the injury) and delayed reconstruction (12 weeks to 2 years after the injury). Multivariable regression models with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were utilized to compare the timing of the surgical procedure with the primary outcome (the Multiligament Quality of Life questionnaire [MLQOL]) and the secondary outcomes (manipulation under anesthesia [MUA], Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] osteoarthritis grade, knee laxity, and range of motion).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 131 patients met our inclusion criteria, with 75 patients in the early reconstruction group and 56 patients in the delayed reconstruction group. The mean time to the surgical procedure was 17.6 days in the early reconstruction group compared with 280 days in the delayed reconstruction group. The mean postoperative follow-up was 58 months. The early reconstruction group, compared with the delayed reconstruction group, included more lateral-sided injuries (49 patients [65%] compared with 23 [41%]; standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.44) and nerve injuries (36 patients [48%] compared with 9 patients [16%]; SMD, 0.72), and had a higher mean Schenck class (SMD, 0.57). After propensity adjustment, we found no difference between early and delayed reconstruction across the 4 MLQOL domains (p > 0.05). Patients in the early reconstruction group had higher odds of requiring MUA compared with the delayed reconstruction group (24 [32%] compared with 8 [14%]; IPTW-adjusted odds ratio [OR], 3.85 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.04 to 7.69]; p < 0.001) and had less knee flexion at the most recent follow-up (β, 6.34° [95% CI, 0.91° to 11.77°]; p = 0.023). Patients undergoing early reconstruction had lower KL osteoarthritis grades compared with patients in the delayed reconstruction group (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.72]; p < 0.001). There were no differences in clinical laxity between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Early reconstruction of MLKIs likely increases the likelihood of postoperative arthrofibrosis compared with delayed reconstruction, but it may be protective against the development of osteoarthritis. When considering the timing of MLKI reconstruction, surgeons should consider the benefit that early reconstruction may convey on long-term outcomes but should caution patients regarding the possibility of requiring an MUA.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.00795","RegionNum":1,"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

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes following early compared with delayed reconstruction in patients with multiligament knee injury (MLKI).

Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients with MLKI from 2007 to 2019 was conducted. Patients who underwent a reconstructive surgical procedure with ≥12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. Patients were stratified into early reconstruction (<6 weeks after the injury) and delayed reconstruction (12 weeks to 2 years after the injury). Multivariable regression models with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were utilized to compare the timing of the surgical procedure with the primary outcome (the Multiligament Quality of Life questionnaire [MLQOL]) and the secondary outcomes (manipulation under anesthesia [MUA], Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] osteoarthritis grade, knee laxity, and range of motion).

Results: A total of 131 patients met our inclusion criteria, with 75 patients in the early reconstruction group and 56 patients in the delayed reconstruction group. The mean time to the surgical procedure was 17.6 days in the early reconstruction group compared with 280 days in the delayed reconstruction group. The mean postoperative follow-up was 58 months. The early reconstruction group, compared with the delayed reconstruction group, included more lateral-sided injuries (49 patients [65%] compared with 23 [41%]; standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.44) and nerve injuries (36 patients [48%] compared with 9 patients [16%]; SMD, 0.72), and had a higher mean Schenck class (SMD, 0.57). After propensity adjustment, we found no difference between early and delayed reconstruction across the 4 MLQOL domains (p > 0.05). Patients in the early reconstruction group had higher odds of requiring MUA compared with the delayed reconstruction group (24 [32%] compared with 8 [14%]; IPTW-adjusted odds ratio [OR], 3.85 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.04 to 7.69]; p < 0.001) and had less knee flexion at the most recent follow-up (β, 6.34° [95% CI, 0.91° to 11.77°]; p = 0.023). Patients undergoing early reconstruction had lower KL osteoarthritis grades compared with patients in the delayed reconstruction group (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.72]; p < 0.001). There were no differences in clinical laxity between groups.

Conclusions: Early reconstruction of MLKIs likely increases the likelihood of postoperative arthrofibrosis compared with delayed reconstruction, but it may be protective against the development of osteoarthritis. When considering the timing of MLKI reconstruction, surgeons should consider the benefit that early reconstruction may convey on long-term outcomes but should caution patients regarding the possibility of requiring an MUA.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

膝关节多韧带损伤早期重建与延迟重建的比较:回顾性倾向分析
研究背景本研究旨在比较膝关节多韧带损伤(MLKI)患者早期重建与延迟重建的结果:对 2007 年至 2019 年期间的多韧带膝关节损伤患者进行了回顾性队列分析。研究纳入了接受重建手术且术后随访时间≥12个月的患者。患者被分层为早期重建(结果:共有131名患者符合我们的纳入标准,其中早期重建组有75名患者,延迟重建组有56名患者。早期重建组的平均手术时间为 17.6 天,而延迟重建组为 280 天。术后平均随访时间为 58 个月。与延迟重建组相比,早期重建组包括更多的侧方损伤(49例患者[65%]与23例患者[41%]相比;标准化平均差[SMD],0.44)和神经损伤(36例患者[48%]与9例患者[16%]相比;SMD,0.72),并且平均申克分级更高(SMD,0.57)。经过倾向调整后,我们发现早期重建和延迟重建在 4 个 MLQOL 领域中没有差异(P > 0.05)。与延迟重建组相比,早期重建组患者需要MUA的几率更高(24[32%]对8[14%];IPTW调整后的几率比[OR],3.85[95%置信区间(CI),2.04至7.69];P <0.001),并且在最近的随访中膝关节屈曲度较低(β,6.34° [95% CI,0.91°至11.77°];P = 0.023)。与延迟重建组患者相比,早期重建组患者的KL骨关节炎分级较低(OR,0.46 [95% CI,0.29至0.72];P <0.001)。两组患者的临床松弛程度没有差异:结论:与延迟重建相比,早期重建MLKI可能会增加术后关节纤维化的可能性,但可能对骨关节炎的发生有保护作用。在考虑MLKI重建的时机时,外科医生应考虑到早期重建对长期预后的益处,但应提醒患者可能需要进行MUA:证据等级:治疗三级。有关证据级别的完整描述,请参阅 "作者须知"。
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
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.50%
发文量
660
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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