关节镜辅助切开复位内固定与传统切开复位内固定治疗踝关节骨折:meta分析的系统回顾

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Marc Meyer-Pries, Melika Hajymiri, Theodoros Lytras, Philip Manolopoulos, Dimitrios Ntourakis
{"title":"关节镜辅助切开复位内固定与传统切开复位内固定治疗踝关节骨折:meta分析的系统回顾","authors":"Marc Meyer-Pries, Melika Hajymiri, Theodoros Lytras, Philip Manolopoulos, Dimitrios Ntourakis","doi":"10.1177/15563316231204616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Arthroscopy can be used to assist the open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) approach in the treatment of acute ankle fractures. Arthroscopy can also help to assess the articular surface but is performed in only 1% of ankle fracture cases. Purpose: We aimed to investigate (1) whether arthroscopy-assisted ORIF (AORIF) would lead to improved postoperative functional outcomes compared to conventional ORIF and (2) whether differences in postoperative complication rates exist between these 2 techniques. Methods: A systematic review was performed; 2 researchers independently searched the online databases of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. All studies that directly investigated the outcomes of AORIF versus conventional ORIF in the treatment of ankle fractures and contained quantitative data were eligible for inclusion. The Cochrane tools for bias assessment were applied independently by 2 researchers. Results: Six articles (2 randomized controlled trials and 4 retrospective cohort studies) were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis of functional outcome scores resulted in a standardized mean difference of 0.6 (confidence interval [CI]: [0.3, 0.9]) favoring AORIF, after excluding 2 studies due to missing standard deviations. The overall complication rate was similar between the 2 groups, with a pooled odds ratio of 1.1 (CI: [0.4, 3.0]). Conclusion: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that AORIF might improve postoperative outcomes without increasing the complication rate when compared to conventional ORIF. However, due to the inherent clinical heterogeneity of the included studies, further well-designed randomized controlled trials are required.","PeriodicalId":35357,"journal":{"name":"Hss Journal","volume":"64 8","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Arthroscopy-Assisted Open Reduction Internal Fixation Versus Conventional Open Reduction Internal Fixation in the Treatment of Ankle Fractures: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Marc Meyer-Pries, Melika Hajymiri, Theodoros Lytras, Philip Manolopoulos, Dimitrios Ntourakis\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15563316231204616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Arthroscopy can be used to assist the open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) approach in the treatment of acute ankle fractures. Arthroscopy can also help to assess the articular surface but is performed in only 1% of ankle fracture cases. Purpose: We aimed to investigate (1) whether arthroscopy-assisted ORIF (AORIF) would lead to improved postoperative functional outcomes compared to conventional ORIF and (2) whether differences in postoperative complication rates exist between these 2 techniques. Methods: A systematic review was performed; 2 researchers independently searched the online databases of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. All studies that directly investigated the outcomes of AORIF versus conventional ORIF in the treatment of ankle fractures and contained quantitative data were eligible for inclusion. The Cochrane tools for bias assessment were applied independently by 2 researchers. Results: Six articles (2 randomized controlled trials and 4 retrospective cohort studies) were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis of functional outcome scores resulted in a standardized mean difference of 0.6 (confidence interval [CI]: [0.3, 0.9]) favoring AORIF, after excluding 2 studies due to missing standard deviations. The overall complication rate was similar between the 2 groups, with a pooled odds ratio of 1.1 (CI: [0.4, 3.0]). Conclusion: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that AORIF might improve postoperative outcomes without increasing the complication rate when compared to conventional ORIF. However, due to the inherent clinical heterogeneity of the included studies, further well-designed randomized controlled trials are required.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hss Journal\",\"volume\":\"64 8\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hss Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15563316231204616\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hss Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15563316231204616","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:关节镜可用于辅助切开复位内固定(ORIF)入路治疗急性踝关节骨折。关节镜也可以帮助评估关节面,但仅在1%的踝关节骨折病例中进行。目的:我们旨在研究(1)与传统的ORIF相比,关节镜辅助ORIF (AORIF)是否能改善术后功能结果;(2)这两种技术在术后并发症发生率上是否存在差异。方法:进行系统评价;2名研究人员独立检索了PubMed、Scopus、Embase、Cochrane、谷歌Scholar等在线数据库。所有直接调查ORIF与传统ORIF治疗踝关节骨折的结果并包含定量数据的研究均符合入选条件。Cochrane偏倚评估工具由2名研究人员独立应用。结果:本系统综述纳入6篇文章(2篇随机对照试验和4篇回顾性队列研究)。在排除了2项因缺失标准差的研究后,功能结局评分的meta分析结果显示,标准化平均差异为0.6(可信区间[CI]:[0.3, 0.9]),有利于AORIF。两组总并发症发生率相似,合并优势比为1.1 (CI:[0.4, 3.0])。结论:本系统综述和荟萃分析的结果表明,与传统ORIF相比,ORIF可以改善术后预后,而不会增加并发症发生率。然而,由于纳入研究的临床异质性,需要进一步设计良好的随机对照试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Arthroscopy-Assisted Open Reduction Internal Fixation Versus Conventional Open Reduction Internal Fixation in the Treatment of Ankle Fractures: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis
Background: Arthroscopy can be used to assist the open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) approach in the treatment of acute ankle fractures. Arthroscopy can also help to assess the articular surface but is performed in only 1% of ankle fracture cases. Purpose: We aimed to investigate (1) whether arthroscopy-assisted ORIF (AORIF) would lead to improved postoperative functional outcomes compared to conventional ORIF and (2) whether differences in postoperative complication rates exist between these 2 techniques. Methods: A systematic review was performed; 2 researchers independently searched the online databases of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. All studies that directly investigated the outcomes of AORIF versus conventional ORIF in the treatment of ankle fractures and contained quantitative data were eligible for inclusion. The Cochrane tools for bias assessment were applied independently by 2 researchers. Results: Six articles (2 randomized controlled trials and 4 retrospective cohort studies) were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis of functional outcome scores resulted in a standardized mean difference of 0.6 (confidence interval [CI]: [0.3, 0.9]) favoring AORIF, after excluding 2 studies due to missing standard deviations. The overall complication rate was similar between the 2 groups, with a pooled odds ratio of 1.1 (CI: [0.4, 3.0]). Conclusion: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that AORIF might improve postoperative outcomes without increasing the complication rate when compared to conventional ORIF. However, due to the inherent clinical heterogeneity of the included studies, further well-designed randomized controlled trials are required.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hss Journal
Hss Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The HSS Journal is the Musculoskeletal Journal of Hospital for Special Surgery. The aim of the HSS Journal is to promote cutting edge research, clinical pathways, and state-of-the-art techniques that inform and facilitate the continuing education of the orthopaedic and musculoskeletal communities. HSS Journal publishes articles that offer contributions to the advancement of the knowledge of musculoskeletal diseases and encourages submission of manuscripts from all musculoskeletal disciplines.
×
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