在评估膝关节软骨修复结果的研究中,翻修手术是最常见的失败定义:一项系统回顾

Q3 Medicine
Lexy Farrington B.S., Marcus Trotter M.D., Ezra Goodrich M.D., Armin Tarakemeh B.A., Erik Henkelman M.D., Paul Schroeppel M.D., Christopher D. Bernard M.D., Rachel Long B.S., Tucker Morey B.S., Jacob White M.S., Bryan G. Vopat M.D.
{"title":"在评估膝关节软骨修复结果的研究中,翻修手术是最常见的失败定义:一项系统回顾","authors":"Lexy Farrington B.S.,&nbsp;Marcus Trotter M.D.,&nbsp;Ezra Goodrich M.D.,&nbsp;Armin Tarakemeh B.A.,&nbsp;Erik Henkelman M.D.,&nbsp;Paul Schroeppel M.D.,&nbsp;Christopher D. Bernard M.D.,&nbsp;Rachel Long B.S.,&nbsp;Tucker Morey B.S.,&nbsp;Jacob White M.S.,&nbsp;Bryan G. Vopat M.D.","doi":"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.101044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To assess the definitions of “failure” of knee chondral restoration surgery in the current literature and to provide a recommendation on what should define failure.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>By use of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses criteria, a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted to identify studies published between January 1, 2017, and May 1, 2021. The inclusion criteria consisted of studies containing patients who underwent knee cartilage surgery that included a definition of failure. We excluded animal studies; articles comparing alternative medical treatments, such as rehabilitation, anti-inflammatory medications, and physical therapy; studies enrolling patients with diseases other than those of the knee, and non–English-language studies. Failure data were extracted and categorized as surgical, graft related, or based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This information was analyzed to develop a recommendation for a standardized definition of failure of knee cartilage restoration.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 61 studies met the inclusion criteria. The most common definition of knee chondral restoration failure was the need for any revision surgery (52 of 61 studies, 85.3%), with failure rates ranging from 3.22% to 75%. Graft failure, defined as delamination and/or graft inadequacy (39 of 61, 63.9%), with failure rates ranging from 2.10% to 47%, and conversion to knee arthroplasty (34 of 61, 55.7%) were also used as definitions. Failure to return to sport and/or regular activity (4 of 61, 6.6%), presence of symptoms (21 of 61, 34.4%), removal of graft or implant (14 of 61, 22.9%), and other unclassified follow-up revisions (8 of 61, 13.1%) were additional definitions of failure documented. Subjective PROs were used in 54.1% of the studies (33 of 61), with failure rates ranging from 3.45% to 59%.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>A variety of definitions of failure are used to evaluate knee chondral restorative surgery outcomes in the orthopaedic literature. Any unplanned revision surgery and graft failure, defined as delamination and/or graft inadequacy, were the most common criteria defining knee chondral restoration failure. Patients’ functionality and quality of life, determined by PROs, were also used to define knee chondral restoration failure in multiple studies. Higher rates of failure were observed after knee chondral restorative procedures when using multiple definitions of failure that were more inclusive. To account for heterogeneity in definitions, procedures, and patient circumstances, we recommend using multiple outcomes, including unplanned surgical procedures, PROs, and the ability to return to the desired level of function, as factors to define failure.</div></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><div>Level IV, systematic review of Level II to IV studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34631,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 101044"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revision Surgery Is the Most Common Definition of Failure in Studies Evaluating Knee Cartilage Restoration Outcomes: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Lexy Farrington B.S.,&nbsp;Marcus Trotter M.D.,&nbsp;Ezra Goodrich M.D.,&nbsp;Armin Tarakemeh B.A.,&nbsp;Erik Henkelman M.D.,&nbsp;Paul Schroeppel M.D.,&nbsp;Christopher D. Bernard M.D.,&nbsp;Rachel Long B.S.,&nbsp;Tucker Morey B.S.,&nbsp;Jacob White M.S.,&nbsp;Bryan G. Vopat M.D.\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.101044\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To assess the definitions of “failure” of knee chondral restoration surgery in the current literature and to provide a recommendation on what should define failure.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>By use of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses criteria, a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted to identify studies published between January 1, 2017, and May 1, 2021. The inclusion criteria consisted of studies containing patients who underwent knee cartilage surgery that included a definition of failure. We excluded animal studies; articles comparing alternative medical treatments, such as rehabilitation, anti-inflammatory medications, and physical therapy; studies enrolling patients with diseases other than those of the knee, and non–English-language studies. Failure data were extracted and categorized as surgical, graft related, or based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This information was analyzed to develop a recommendation for a standardized definition of failure of knee cartilage restoration.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 61 studies met the inclusion criteria. The most common definition of knee chondral restoration failure was the need for any revision surgery (52 of 61 studies, 85.3%), with failure rates ranging from 3.22% to 75%. Graft failure, defined as delamination and/or graft inadequacy (39 of 61, 63.9%), with failure rates ranging from 2.10% to 47%, and conversion to knee arthroplasty (34 of 61, 55.7%) were also used as definitions. Failure to return to sport and/or regular activity (4 of 61, 6.6%), presence of symptoms (21 of 61, 34.4%), removal of graft or implant (14 of 61, 22.9%), and other unclassified follow-up revisions (8 of 61, 13.1%) were additional definitions of failure documented. Subjective PROs were used in 54.1% of the studies (33 of 61), with failure rates ranging from 3.45% to 59%.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>A variety of definitions of failure are used to evaluate knee chondral restorative surgery outcomes in the orthopaedic literature. Any unplanned revision surgery and graft failure, defined as delamination and/or graft inadequacy, were the most common criteria defining knee chondral restoration failure. Patients’ functionality and quality of life, determined by PROs, were also used to define knee chondral restoration failure in multiple studies. Higher rates of failure were observed after knee chondral restorative procedures when using multiple definitions of failure that were more inclusive. To account for heterogeneity in definitions, procedures, and patient circumstances, we recommend using multiple outcomes, including unplanned surgical procedures, PROs, and the ability to return to the desired level of function, as factors to define failure.</div></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><div>Level IV, systematic review of Level II to IV studies.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34631,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"7 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 101044\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24001871\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24001871","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估目前文献中膝关节软骨修复手术“失败”的定义,并对失败的定义提出建议。方法使用首选报告项目进行系统评价和meta分析标准,对PubMed、Embase、Ovid和Cochrane图书馆数据库进行系统搜索,以确定2017年1月1日至2021年5月1日之间发表的研究。纳入标准包括接受膝关节软骨手术的患者的研究,包括失败的定义。我们排除了动物研究;比较替代医学治疗,如康复、抗炎药物和物理治疗的文章;包括非膝关节疾病患者的研究,以及非英语研究。失败数据被提取并分类为手术、移植物相关或基于患者报告的结果(PROs)。对这些信息进行分析,以制定膝关节软骨修复失败的标准化定义。结果61项研究符合纳入标准。膝关节软骨修复失败最常见的定义是需要任何翻修手术(61项研究中的52项,85.3%),失败率从3.22%到75%不等。移植物失败,定义为脱层和/或移植物不足(61例中有39例,63.9%),失败率从2.10%到47%不等,转换为膝关节置换术(61例中有34例,55.7%)也被用作定义。未能恢复运动和/或正常活动(61人中4人,6.6%),出现症状(61人中21人,34.4%),移除移植物或植入物(61人中14人,22.9%),以及其他未分类的随访修订(61人中8人,13.1%)是记录的失败的附加定义。54.1%的研究(61例中的33例)使用了主观赞成意见,失败率从3.45%到59%不等。结论骨科文献中对膝关节软骨修复手术失败的定义多种多样。任何计划外翻修手术和移植物失败,定义为脱层和/或移植物不足,是膝关节软骨修复失败的最常见标准。在多项研究中,由PROs确定的患者功能和生活质量也被用来定义膝关节软骨修复失败。当使用更具包容性的多种失败定义时,膝关节软骨修复手术后观察到更高的失败率。考虑到定义、手术和患者情况的异质性,我们建议使用多种结果作为定义失败的因素,包括计划外手术、PROs和恢复预期功能水平的能力。证据等级:IV级,对II至IV级研究的系统评价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Revision Surgery Is the Most Common Definition of Failure in Studies Evaluating Knee Cartilage Restoration Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Purpose

To assess the definitions of “failure” of knee chondral restoration surgery in the current literature and to provide a recommendation on what should define failure.

Methods

By use of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses criteria, a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted to identify studies published between January 1, 2017, and May 1, 2021. The inclusion criteria consisted of studies containing patients who underwent knee cartilage surgery that included a definition of failure. We excluded animal studies; articles comparing alternative medical treatments, such as rehabilitation, anti-inflammatory medications, and physical therapy; studies enrolling patients with diseases other than those of the knee, and non–English-language studies. Failure data were extracted and categorized as surgical, graft related, or based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This information was analyzed to develop a recommendation for a standardized definition of failure of knee cartilage restoration.

Results

A total of 61 studies met the inclusion criteria. The most common definition of knee chondral restoration failure was the need for any revision surgery (52 of 61 studies, 85.3%), with failure rates ranging from 3.22% to 75%. Graft failure, defined as delamination and/or graft inadequacy (39 of 61, 63.9%), with failure rates ranging from 2.10% to 47%, and conversion to knee arthroplasty (34 of 61, 55.7%) were also used as definitions. Failure to return to sport and/or regular activity (4 of 61, 6.6%), presence of symptoms (21 of 61, 34.4%), removal of graft or implant (14 of 61, 22.9%), and other unclassified follow-up revisions (8 of 61, 13.1%) were additional definitions of failure documented. Subjective PROs were used in 54.1% of the studies (33 of 61), with failure rates ranging from 3.45% to 59%.

Conclusions

A variety of definitions of failure are used to evaluate knee chondral restorative surgery outcomes in the orthopaedic literature. Any unplanned revision surgery and graft failure, defined as delamination and/or graft inadequacy, were the most common criteria defining knee chondral restoration failure. Patients’ functionality and quality of life, determined by PROs, were also used to define knee chondral restoration failure in multiple studies. Higher rates of failure were observed after knee chondral restorative procedures when using multiple definitions of failure that were more inclusive. To account for heterogeneity in definitions, procedures, and patient circumstances, we recommend using multiple outcomes, including unplanned surgical procedures, PROs, and the ability to return to the desired level of function, as factors to define failure.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review of Level II to IV studies.
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
218
审稿时长
45 weeks
×
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