M Alessio-Mazzola, D Tradati, M Slongo, A Belluati, G Placella, V Salini
{"title":"单束前交叉韧带重建中经胫骨与股骨前内侧运输隧道的比较:前瞻性随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"M Alessio-Mazzola, D Tradati, M Slongo, A Belluati, G Placella, V Salini","doi":"10.1007/s12306-024-00823-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the comparative clinical and functional outcomes, postoperative complications, and radiological outcomes of single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) performed using the transtibial (TT) approach or anteromedial (AM) technique. A systematic review of the literature was performed according to Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. RCTs comparing TT and AM techniques were considered only. The quality of the studies was defined using the GRADE system, and the risk of bias was assessed with the RoB 2 tool. The primary endpoint was to systematically review and meta-analyze the clinical outcomes, residual laxity and failure rate of both AM and TT techniques. In the current meta-analysis 13 RCTs involving 989 patients who underwent arthroscopic single-bundle ACLR (486 TT and 503 AM) were included. Patients undergoing AM technique resulted in higher objective-IKDC (p < 0.001) and Lysholm scores (p = 0.002), despite a lower incidence of pathological anterior tibial translation (p < 0.001) and positive pivot-shift test (p < 0.001). No differences were detected in IKDC subjective score (p = 0.26), Tegner activity scale (p = 0.18) and graft failure (p = 0.07). ACL reconstruction through AM portal technique provides better clinical outcomes and lower incidence of residual rotational and anteroposterior laxity in comparison with the TT technique. No statistically significant difference in subjective outcomes and graft failure was reported.</p>","PeriodicalId":18875,"journal":{"name":"MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY","volume":" ","pages":"251-274"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transtibial versus anteromedial transportal femoral tunnel in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"M Alessio-Mazzola, D Tradati, M Slongo, A Belluati, G Placella, V Salini\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12306-024-00823-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the comparative clinical and functional outcomes, postoperative complications, and radiological outcomes of single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) performed using the transtibial (TT) approach or anteromedial (AM) technique. A systematic review of the literature was performed according to Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. RCTs comparing TT and AM techniques were considered only. The quality of the studies was defined using the GRADE system, and the risk of bias was assessed with the RoB 2 tool. The primary endpoint was to systematically review and meta-analyze the clinical outcomes, residual laxity and failure rate of both AM and TT techniques. In the current meta-analysis 13 RCTs involving 989 patients who underwent arthroscopic single-bundle ACLR (486 TT and 503 AM) were included. Patients undergoing AM technique resulted in higher objective-IKDC (p < 0.001) and Lysholm scores (p = 0.002), despite a lower incidence of pathological anterior tibial translation (p < 0.001) and positive pivot-shift test (p < 0.001). No differences were detected in IKDC subjective score (p = 0.26), Tegner activity scale (p = 0.18) and graft failure (p = 0.07). ACL reconstruction through AM portal technique provides better clinical outcomes and lower incidence of residual rotational and anteroposterior laxity in comparison with the TT technique. No statistically significant difference in subjective outcomes and graft failure was reported.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18875,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"251-274\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-024-00823-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-024-00823-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究旨在系统回顾和荟萃分析随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验报告了采用经胫骨(TT)方法或前内侧(AM)技术进行单束前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)的临床和功能结果、术后并发症和放射学结果的比较。根据 Cochrane 和 PRISMA 指南对文献进行了系统性回顾。仅考虑了比较 TT 和 AM 技术的 RCT。研究质量采用 GRADE 系统进行界定,偏倚风险采用 RoB 2 工具进行评估。研究的主要目的是对 AM 和 TT 技术的临床效果、残余松弛度和失败率进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。在当前的荟萃分析中,共纳入了13项研究,涉及989名接受关节镜单束前交叉韧带置换术的患者(486名TT患者和503名AM患者)。接受 AM 技术的患者客观 IKDC 值更高(p
Transtibial versus anteromedial transportal femoral tunnel in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials.
The purpose of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the comparative clinical and functional outcomes, postoperative complications, and radiological outcomes of single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) performed using the transtibial (TT) approach or anteromedial (AM) technique. A systematic review of the literature was performed according to Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. RCTs comparing TT and AM techniques were considered only. The quality of the studies was defined using the GRADE system, and the risk of bias was assessed with the RoB 2 tool. The primary endpoint was to systematically review and meta-analyze the clinical outcomes, residual laxity and failure rate of both AM and TT techniques. In the current meta-analysis 13 RCTs involving 989 patients who underwent arthroscopic single-bundle ACLR (486 TT and 503 AM) were included. Patients undergoing AM technique resulted in higher objective-IKDC (p < 0.001) and Lysholm scores (p = 0.002), despite a lower incidence of pathological anterior tibial translation (p < 0.001) and positive pivot-shift test (p < 0.001). No differences were detected in IKDC subjective score (p = 0.26), Tegner activity scale (p = 0.18) and graft failure (p = 0.07). ACL reconstruction through AM portal technique provides better clinical outcomes and lower incidence of residual rotational and anteroposterior laxity in comparison with the TT technique. No statistically significant difference in subjective outcomes and graft failure was reported.
期刊介绍:
Musculoskeletal Surgery – Formerly La Chirurgia degli Organi di Movimento, founded in 1917 at the Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, is a peer-reviewed journal published three times a year. The journal provides up-to-date information to clinicians and scientists through the publication of original papers, reviews, case reports, and brief communications dealing with the pathogenesis and treatment of orthopaedic conditions.An electronic version is also available at http://www.springerlink.com.The journal is open for publication of supplements and for publishing abstracts of scientific meetings; conditions can be obtained from the Editors-in-Chief or the Publisher.