腕中关节融合术伴或不伴三骨肌切除:系统综述。

IF 0.6 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Journal of Wrist Surgery Pub Date : 2024-06-26 eCollection Date: 2025-06-01 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1786027
Richard Tee, J R Onggo, Nicola F Fine, Stephen K Tham, Eugene T Ek
{"title":"腕中关节融合术伴或不伴三骨肌切除:系统综述。","authors":"Richard Tee, J R Onggo, Nicola F Fine, Stephen K Tham, Eugene T Ek","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1786027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose</b>  The purpose of this systematic review is to compare the clinical outcomes of midcarpal arthrodesis with triquetrum excision against midcarpal fusion without the excision of triquetrum performed using modern osteosynthesis technology. <b>Materials and Methods</b>  A systematic review of publications in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Review was conducted. The studies that utilized osteosynthesis techniques other than Kirshner wire, with at least 10 patients, and had a minimum one-year follow-up period in English language were included. The quality of studies were evaluated using validated tools for assessing observational studies. Union rate, functional outcomes and revision/complication rates were collected and analyzed. <b>Results</b>  A meta-analysis was not possible. Based on pooled data the flexion-extension arc improved by 6 degrees for midcarpal arthrodesis group with triquetrum excision, but decreased by 11 degrees in the group without. The radial-ulnar arc improved by 5 degrees in the triquetrum excision group, but decreased by 3 degrees in the triquetrum preserving group. Improvement in grip strength appears to be better in the triquetrum preserving group (10 kg as opposed to 1 kg), while there were no observable difference in pain score. <b>Conclusion</b>  The literature lacked good comparison studies to examine the role of triquetrum excision in midcarpal fusion. While midcarpal fusion with triquetrum excision appeared to yield better ROM in the pooled data, studies with direct comparison of the two techniques are required to fill in the gap. <b>Type of Study/Level of Evidence</b>  Therapeutic IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":46757,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wrist Surgery","volume":"14 3","pages":"283-294"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12088800/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Midcarpal Arthrodesis with or without Excision of Triquetrum: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Richard Tee, J R Onggo, Nicola F Fine, Stephen K Tham, Eugene T Ek\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0044-1786027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose</b>  The purpose of this systematic review is to compare the clinical outcomes of midcarpal arthrodesis with triquetrum excision against midcarpal fusion without the excision of triquetrum performed using modern osteosynthesis technology. <b>Materials and Methods</b>  A systematic review of publications in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Review was conducted. The studies that utilized osteosynthesis techniques other than Kirshner wire, with at least 10 patients, and had a minimum one-year follow-up period in English language were included. The quality of studies were evaluated using validated tools for assessing observational studies. Union rate, functional outcomes and revision/complication rates were collected and analyzed. <b>Results</b>  A meta-analysis was not possible. Based on pooled data the flexion-extension arc improved by 6 degrees for midcarpal arthrodesis group with triquetrum excision, but decreased by 11 degrees in the group without. The radial-ulnar arc improved by 5 degrees in the triquetrum excision group, but decreased by 3 degrees in the triquetrum preserving group. Improvement in grip strength appears to be better in the triquetrum preserving group (10 kg as opposed to 1 kg), while there were no observable difference in pain score. <b>Conclusion</b>  The literature lacked good comparison studies to examine the role of triquetrum excision in midcarpal fusion. While midcarpal fusion with triquetrum excision appeared to yield better ROM in the pooled data, studies with direct comparison of the two techniques are required to fill in the gap. <b>Type of Study/Level of Evidence</b>  Therapeutic IV.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46757,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Wrist Surgery\",\"volume\":\"14 3\",\"pages\":\"283-294\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12088800/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Wrist Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1786027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wrist Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1786027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本系统综述的目的是比较采用现代骨合成技术进行腕骨融合术和不切除三骨嵴的腕骨融合术的临床结果。材料与方法对PubMed、Medline、EMBASE和Cochrane系统评价数据库中的出版物进行系统评价。采用克氏针以外的骨固定技术,至少有10例患者,至少有1年的英语随访期。使用经过验证的观察性研究评估工具对研究质量进行评估。收集并分析愈合率、功能结局和翻修/并发症发生率。结果无法进行meta分析。根据汇总的数据,腕骨正中关节融合术组的屈伸弧度提高了6度,而未切除三髋骨的组则下降了11度。三骨瓣切除组桡骨尺弧度增加了5度,保留三骨瓣组则减少了3度。保留三骨瓣组握力的改善似乎更好(10 kg相对于1 kg),而疼痛评分没有明显差异。结论文献缺乏较好的比较研究来检验三骨骨切除术在腕中部融合中的作用。虽然在汇集的数据中,腕中部融合与三骨瓣切除似乎产生了更好的ROM,但需要对两种技术进行直接比较的研究来填补空白。研究类型/证据水平
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Midcarpal Arthrodesis with or without Excision of Triquetrum: A Systematic Review.

Purpose  The purpose of this systematic review is to compare the clinical outcomes of midcarpal arthrodesis with triquetrum excision against midcarpal fusion without the excision of triquetrum performed using modern osteosynthesis technology. Materials and Methods  A systematic review of publications in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Review was conducted. The studies that utilized osteosynthesis techniques other than Kirshner wire, with at least 10 patients, and had a minimum one-year follow-up period in English language were included. The quality of studies were evaluated using validated tools for assessing observational studies. Union rate, functional outcomes and revision/complication rates were collected and analyzed. Results  A meta-analysis was not possible. Based on pooled data the flexion-extension arc improved by 6 degrees for midcarpal arthrodesis group with triquetrum excision, but decreased by 11 degrees in the group without. The radial-ulnar arc improved by 5 degrees in the triquetrum excision group, but decreased by 3 degrees in the triquetrum preserving group. Improvement in grip strength appears to be better in the triquetrum preserving group (10 kg as opposed to 1 kg), while there were no observable difference in pain score. Conclusion  The literature lacked good comparison studies to examine the role of triquetrum excision in midcarpal fusion. While midcarpal fusion with triquetrum excision appeared to yield better ROM in the pooled data, studies with direct comparison of the two techniques are required to fill in the gap. Type of Study/Level of Evidence  Therapeutic IV.

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
自引率
28.60%
发文量
78
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信