Evaluating the Impact of Biological Augmentation on Failure Rates and Complications in Acute Patellar Tendon Rupture Surgery Compared With Isolated Repair.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-18 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1177/23259671241288848
Rodrigo Olivieri, José Ignacio Laso, Nicolás Franulic, José T Muñoz, Jaime Ugarte, Piero Innocenti
{"title":"Evaluating the Impact of Biological Augmentation on Failure Rates and Complications in Acute Patellar Tendon Rupture Surgery Compared With Isolated Repair.","authors":"Rodrigo Olivieri, José Ignacio Laso, Nicolás Franulic, José T Muñoz, Jaime Ugarte, Piero Innocenti","doi":"10.1177/23259671241288848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patellar tendon ruptures are infrequent but disabling injuries. Surgical treatment is the gold standard to obtain good outcomes, and numerous techniques have been described. Biomechanical studies report better results when augmented techniques are used. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the best standard technique.</p><p><strong>Purpose/hypothesis: </strong>The purpose of this study was to assess a cohort of patients with acute patellar tendon rupture that was surgically treated and to compare the clinical outcomes of 2 groups: isolated repair and biological augmentation techniques with autograft or allograft. It was hypothesized that the biological augmentation group would have better clinical outcomes than the isolated repair group.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients with acute patellar tendon rupture surgically treated in our center between 2016 and 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient and rupture characteristics, surgical technique, clinical outcomes, and complications were recorded. The primary outcome was rerupture rate, and secondary outcomes were infection rate, stiffness >15° of knee flexion deficit, and extensor mechanism lag >5°.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 34 patients with 36 operated knees (2 patients with bilateral rupture). The mean age was 44.9 years. Isolated repair was performed in 20 knees (55.6%), and 16 knees underwent repair and biological augmentation with autograft or allograft. Both groups were comparable in terms of their demographic characteristics. A statistically significant association was found between the type of surgery and tendon rerupture. Of the patients in the isolated repair group, 5 of 20 (25%) experienced a failure, whereas in the biological augmentation group, no reruptures were recorded (<i>P</i> = .031). However, no statistically significant associations were found between the type of surgery and other complications, such as the development of stiffness (<i>P</i> = .54), residual extension lag >5° (<i>P</i> = .87), or the development of infection (<i>P</i> = .25).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this cohort of patients, biological augmentation reduced the rate of surgical failure for acute patellar tendon rupture without being associated with a higher risk of complications such as stiffness, residual extension lag, or the development of infection.</p>","PeriodicalId":19646,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"12 11","pages":"23259671241288848"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11574890/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241288848","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patellar tendon ruptures are infrequent but disabling injuries. Surgical treatment is the gold standard to obtain good outcomes, and numerous techniques have been described. Biomechanical studies report better results when augmented techniques are used. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the best standard technique.

Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to assess a cohort of patients with acute patellar tendon rupture that was surgically treated and to compare the clinical outcomes of 2 groups: isolated repair and biological augmentation techniques with autograft or allograft. It was hypothesized that the biological augmentation group would have better clinical outcomes than the isolated repair group.

Study design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: All patients with acute patellar tendon rupture surgically treated in our center between 2016 and 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient and rupture characteristics, surgical technique, clinical outcomes, and complications were recorded. The primary outcome was rerupture rate, and secondary outcomes were infection rate, stiffness >15° of knee flexion deficit, and extensor mechanism lag >5°.

Results: The study included 34 patients with 36 operated knees (2 patients with bilateral rupture). The mean age was 44.9 years. Isolated repair was performed in 20 knees (55.6%), and 16 knees underwent repair and biological augmentation with autograft or allograft. Both groups were comparable in terms of their demographic characteristics. A statistically significant association was found between the type of surgery and tendon rerupture. Of the patients in the isolated repair group, 5 of 20 (25%) experienced a failure, whereas in the biological augmentation group, no reruptures were recorded (P = .031). However, no statistically significant associations were found between the type of surgery and other complications, such as the development of stiffness (P = .54), residual extension lag >5° (P = .87), or the development of infection (P = .25).

Conclusion: In this cohort of patients, biological augmentation reduced the rate of surgical failure for acute patellar tendon rupture without being associated with a higher risk of complications such as stiffness, residual extension lag, or the development of infection.

与孤立修复术相比,评估生物增强技术对急性髌腱断裂手术失败率和并发症的影响
背景:髌腱断裂是一种不常见但会致残的损伤。手术治疗是获得良好疗效的金标准,目前已介绍了多种技术。生物力学研究报告称,使用增强型技术治疗效果更好。然而,关于最佳标准技术还缺乏共识:本研究的目的是评估一批接受过手术治疗的急性髌腱断裂患者,并比较两组患者的临床效果:孤立修复组和采用自体或异体移植的生物增强技术组。假设生物增强组的临床疗效优于孤立修复组:研究设计:队列研究;证据级别:3:回顾性分析2016年至2022年期间在本中心接受手术治疗的所有急性髌腱断裂患者。记录了患者和断裂特征、手术技术、临床结果和并发症。主要结果为再断裂率,次要结果为感染率、膝关节僵硬度>15°屈曲障碍和伸肌机制滞后>5°:研究包括 34 名患者,36 个手术膝关节(2 名患者双侧膝关节破裂)。平均年龄为 44.9 岁。20个膝关节(55.6%)进行了单独修复,16个膝关节进行了修复并使用自体或异体移植进行了生物增量。两组患者的人口统计学特征相当。在统计学上发现,手术类型与肌腱断裂之间存在明显关联。在孤立修复组的 20 位患者中,有 5 位(25%)出现失败,而在生物增生组中,没有出现肌腱再断裂的记录(P = 0.031)。然而,手术类型与其他并发症之间没有统计学意义上的明显关联,如出现僵硬(P = .54)、残余延伸滞后>5°(P = .87)或出现感染(P = .25):结论:在这批患者中,生物增强术降低了急性髌腱断裂的手术失败率,但并不增加发生僵硬、残余伸展滞后或感染等并发症的风险。
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
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
876
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine (OJSM), developed by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), is a global, peer-reviewed, open access journal that combines the interests of researchers and clinical practitioners across orthopaedic sports medicine, arthroscopy, and knee arthroplasty. Topics include original research in the areas of: -Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, including surgical and nonsurgical treatment of orthopaedic sports injuries -Arthroscopic Surgery (Shoulder/Elbow/Wrist/Hip/Knee/Ankle/Foot) -Relevant translational research -Sports traumatology/epidemiology -Knee and shoulder arthroplasty The OJSM also publishes relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
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