膝关节多韧带损伤重建的移植物选择:系统综述。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Pub Date : 2025-04-04 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1007/s43465-024-01318-w
Joshi Amit, Regmi Subhash, Poudel Pranodan, Basukala Bibek
{"title":"膝关节多韧带损伤重建的移植物选择:系统综述。","authors":"Joshi Amit, Regmi Subhash, Poudel Pranodan, Basukala Bibek","doi":"10.1007/s43465-024-01318-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The literature lacks enough synthesis on which autograft option is suitable for a particular ligament reconstruction during multi-ligament reconstruction. This study aims to conduct a systematic review of existing literature to determine graft options available for the reconstruction of various ligaments in the context of multi-ligament knee injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted following the preferred research items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. It was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024498917). Studies that met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this systematic review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 8070 identified citations, 16 studies with a total of 640 patients(645 knees), including 420(65.6%) males and 220(34.4%) females, with a mean age of 35.1 years were included. Among 16 papers included in this review, combining autografts, allografts, or synthetic grafts was the preferred choice in seven studies. Autografts were chosen in five research studies, while allografts were preferred in four. For Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction: Eleven studies used only autografts, two used only allografts, and 1 study used both autografts and allografts. For Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PCL) reconstruction, nine studies used allografts, six used autografts, and 1 study used synthetic graft. For Posterior Lateral Corner (PLC) reconstruction, six studies used allografts, five used autografts, and 1 study used synthetic graft. For posterior medial corner (PMC) reconstruction, eight studies used autografts, five used allografts, and only one used synthetic grafts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A combination of autografts, allografts, or synthetic grafts was the preferred graft option for multi-ligament knee reconstruction. Autografts are the most preferred option for ACL and PMC reconstruction, whereas allografts are the most preferred option for PCL and PLC reconstruction. The most preferred autograft was the Hamstring Tendon (HT) autograft. Similarly, the tendoachillies (TA) was the most used allograft. However, the strength of the evidence in this review is moderate to low.</p>","PeriodicalId":13338,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics","volume":"59 4","pages":"453-463"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12014997/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Graft Options for the Reconstruction of Multi-ligament Knee Injury: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Joshi Amit, Regmi Subhash, Poudel Pranodan, Basukala Bibek\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43465-024-01318-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The literature lacks enough synthesis on which autograft option is suitable for a particular ligament reconstruction during multi-ligament reconstruction. This study aims to conduct a systematic review of existing literature to determine graft options available for the reconstruction of various ligaments in the context of multi-ligament knee injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted following the preferred research items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. It was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024498917). Studies that met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this systematic review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 8070 identified citations, 16 studies with a total of 640 patients(645 knees), including 420(65.6%) males and 220(34.4%) females, with a mean age of 35.1 years were included. Among 16 papers included in this review, combining autografts, allografts, or synthetic grafts was the preferred choice in seven studies. Autografts were chosen in five research studies, while allografts were preferred in four. For Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction: Eleven studies used only autografts, two used only allografts, and 1 study used both autografts and allografts. For Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PCL) reconstruction, nine studies used allografts, six used autografts, and 1 study used synthetic graft. For Posterior Lateral Corner (PLC) reconstruction, six studies used allografts, five used autografts, and 1 study used synthetic graft. For posterior medial corner (PMC) reconstruction, eight studies used autografts, five used allografts, and only one used synthetic grafts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A combination of autografts, allografts, or synthetic grafts was the preferred graft option for multi-ligament knee reconstruction. Autografts are the most preferred option for ACL and PMC reconstruction, whereas allografts are the most preferred option for PCL and PLC reconstruction. The most preferred autograft was the Hamstring Tendon (HT) autograft. Similarly, the tendoachillies (TA) was the most used allograft. However, the strength of the evidence in this review is moderate to low.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13338,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics\",\"volume\":\"59 4\",\"pages\":\"453-463\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12014997/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-024-01318-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-024-01318-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文献缺乏足够的综合,在多韧带重建中,自体移植物选择适合于特定的韧带重建。本研究旨在对现有文献进行系统回顾,以确定在膝关节多韧带损伤的情况下,各种韧带重建的移植物选择。方法:按照系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选研究项目进行系统评价。它被注册在普洛斯彼罗(CRD42024498917)。符合预定纳入和排除标准的研究被纳入本系统评价。结果:在8070篇检索到的引文中,纳入16项研究,共640例患者(645例膝关节),其中男性420例(65.6%),女性220例(34.4%),平均年龄35.1岁。在本综述纳入的16篇论文中,有7篇研究优先选择自体移植物、同种异体移植物或合成移植物。5项研究选择自体移植物,4项研究选择同种异体移植物。前交叉韧带(ACL)重建:11项研究仅使用自体移植物,2项仅使用同种异体移植物,1项研究同时使用自体移植物和同种异体移植物。对于后交叉韧带(PCL)重建,9项研究使用同种异体移植物,6项使用自体移植物,1项研究使用合成移植物。对于后外侧角(PLC)重建,6项研究使用同种异体移植物,5项使用自体移植物,1项研究使用合成移植物。对于后内侧角(PMC)重建,8项研究使用自体移植物,5项使用同种异体移植物,只有1项使用合成移植物。结论:自体移植物、同种异体移植物或合成移植物联合移植是多韧带膝关节重建的首选选择。自体移植物是ACL和PMC重建的首选,而同种异体移植物是PCL和PLC重建的首选。最受欢迎的自体移植物是腘绳肌腱(HT)自体移植物。同样,跟腱(TA)是最常用的同种异体移植物。然而,本综述的证据强度是中等到低的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Graft Options for the Reconstruction of Multi-ligament Knee Injury: A Systematic Review.

Introduction: The literature lacks enough synthesis on which autograft option is suitable for a particular ligament reconstruction during multi-ligament reconstruction. This study aims to conduct a systematic review of existing literature to determine graft options available for the reconstruction of various ligaments in the context of multi-ligament knee injury.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted following the preferred research items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. It was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024498917). Studies that met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this systematic review.

Results: Out of 8070 identified citations, 16 studies with a total of 640 patients(645 knees), including 420(65.6%) males and 220(34.4%) females, with a mean age of 35.1 years were included. Among 16 papers included in this review, combining autografts, allografts, or synthetic grafts was the preferred choice in seven studies. Autografts were chosen in five research studies, while allografts were preferred in four. For Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction: Eleven studies used only autografts, two used only allografts, and 1 study used both autografts and allografts. For Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PCL) reconstruction, nine studies used allografts, six used autografts, and 1 study used synthetic graft. For Posterior Lateral Corner (PLC) reconstruction, six studies used allografts, five used autografts, and 1 study used synthetic graft. For posterior medial corner (PMC) reconstruction, eight studies used autografts, five used allografts, and only one used synthetic grafts.

Conclusion: A combination of autografts, allografts, or synthetic grafts was the preferred graft option for multi-ligament knee reconstruction. Autografts are the most preferred option for ACL and PMC reconstruction, whereas allografts are the most preferred option for PCL and PLC reconstruction. The most preferred autograft was the Hamstring Tendon (HT) autograft. Similarly, the tendoachillies (TA) was the most used allograft. However, the strength of the evidence in this review is moderate to low.

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
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
185
审稿时长
9 months
期刊介绍: IJO welcomes articles that contribute to Orthopaedic knowledge from India and overseas. We publish articles dealing with clinical orthopaedics and basic research in orthopaedic surgery. Articles are accepted only for exclusive publication in the Indian Journal of Orthopaedics. Previously published articles, articles which are in peer-reviewed electronic publications in other journals, are not accepted by the Journal. Published articles and illustrations become the property of the Journal. The copyright remains with the journal. Studies must be carried out in accordance with World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
×
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