髌骨肌腱病(跳膝)手术。

IF 0.9 Q4 BUSINESS
Michael Dan, Alfred Phillips, Renea V Johnston, Ian A Harris
{"title":"髌骨肌腱病(跳膝)手术。","authors":"Michael Dan, Alfred Phillips, Renea V Johnston, Ian A Harris","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD013034.pub2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patellar tendinopathy is an overuse condition that commonly affects athletes. Surgery is usually offered if medical and physical therapies fail to treat it effectively. There is variation in the type of surgery performed for the condition.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the benefits and harms of surgery for patellar tendinopathy in adults.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched the following databases, to 17 July 2018: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Library, OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, clinical trial registries (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) and the WHO trials portal (www.who.int/ictrp/en/).</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared surgical techniques (open or arthroscopic) with non-operative treatment (including placebo surgery, exercise or other non-surgical modalities) in adults with patellar tendinopathy.Major outcomes assessed were knee pain, function, quality of life, participant global assessment of success, withdrawal rate, proportion with adverse events and proportion with tendon rupture.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Two review authors selected studies for inclusion, extracted trial characteristics and outcome data, assessed the risk of bias and assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>Two trials (92 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Participants in both trials were followed for 12 months. Neither trial compared surgery to placebo surgery. One trial (40 randomised participants) compared open surgical excision with eccentric exercises, and the other compared arthroscopic surgery with sclerosing injections (52 randomised participants). Due to the nature of the interventions, neither the participants or the investigators were blinded to the group allocation, resulting in the potential for performance and detection bias. Some outcomes were selectively not recorded, leading to reporting bias. Overall, the certainty of the evidence from these studies was low for all outcomes due to the potential for bias, and imprecision due to small sample sizes.Compared with eccentric exercises, low-certainty evidence indicates that open surgical excision provides no clinically important benefits with respect to knee pain, function or global assessment of success. At 12 months, mean knee pain - measured by pain with standing jump on a 10-point scale (lower scores indicating less pain) - was 1.7 points (standard deviation (SD) 1.6) in the eccentric training group and 1.3 (SD 0.8) in the surgical group (one trial, 40 participants). This equates to an absolute pain reduction of 4% (ranging from 4% worse to 12% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 15%) and a relative reduction in pain of 10% better (ranging from 30% better to 10% worse) in the treatment group. At 12 months, function on the zero- to 100-point Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment (VISA) scale was 65.7 (SD 23.8) in the eccentric training group and 72.9 (SD 11.7) in the surgical group (one trial, 40 participants). This equates to an absolute change of 7% better function (ranging from 4% worse to 19% better) and relative change of 25% better (ranging from 15% worse to 65% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 13%). Participant global assessment of success was measured by the number of people with no pain at 12 months: 7/20 participants in the eccentric training group reported no pain, compared with 5/20 in the open surgical group (risk ratio (RR) 0.71 (95% CI 0.27 to 1.88); one trial, 40 participants). There were no withdrawals, but five out of 20 people from the eccentric exercise group crossed over to open surgical excision. Quality of life, adverse events and tendon ruptures were not measured.Compared with sclerosing injection, low-certainty evidence indicates that arthroscopic surgery may provide a reduction in pain and improvement in participant global assessment of success, however further studies are likely to change these results. At 12 months, mean pain with activities, measured on a 100-point scale (lower scores indicating less pain), was 41.1 (SD 28.5) in the sclerosing injection group and 12.8 (SD 19.3) in the arthroscopic surgery group (one trial, 52 participants). This equates to an absolute pain reduction of 28% better (ranging from 15% to 42% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 15%), and a relative change of 41% better (ranging from 21% to 61% better). At 12 months, the mean participant global assessment of success, measured by satisfaction on a 100-point scale (scale zero to 100, higher scores indicating greater satisfaction), was 52.9 (SD 32.6) in the sclerosing injection group and 86.8 (SD 20.8) in the arthroscopic surgery group (one trial, 52 participants). This equates to an absolute improvement of 34% (ranging from 19% to 49%). In both groups, one participant (4%) withdrew from the study. Functional outcome scores, including the VISA score, were not reported. Quality-of-life assessment, adverse events, and specifically the proportion with a tendon rupture, were not reported.We did not perform subgroup analysis to assess differences in outcome between arthroscopic or open surgical excision, as we did not identify more than one study with a common comparator.</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>We are uncertain if surgery is beneficial over other therapeutic interventions, namely eccentric exercises or injectables. Low-certainty evidence shows that surgery for patellar tendinopathy may not provide clinically important benefits over eccentric exercise in terms of pain, function or participant-reported treatment success, but may provide clinically meaningful pain reduction and treatment success when compared with sclerosing injections. However, further research is likely to change these results. The evidence was downgraded two levels due to the small sample sizes and susceptibility to bias. We are uncertain if there are additional risks associated with surgery as study authors failed to report adverse events. Surgery seems to be embedded in clinical practice for late-stage patella tendinopathy, due to exhaustion of other therapeutic methods rather than evidence of benefit.</p>","PeriodicalId":45683,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Industry Competition & Trade","volume":"5 1","pages":"CD013034"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6756823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgery for patellar tendinopathy (jumper's knee).\",\"authors\":\"Michael Dan, Alfred Phillips, Renea V Johnston, Ian A Harris\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/14651858.CD013034.pub2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patellar tendinopathy is an overuse condition that commonly affects athletes. Surgery is usually offered if medical and physical therapies fail to treat it effectively. There is variation in the type of surgery performed for the condition.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the benefits and harms of surgery for patellar tendinopathy in adults.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched the following databases, to 17 July 2018: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Library, OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, clinical trial registries (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) and the WHO trials portal (www.who.int/ictrp/en/).</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared surgical techniques (open or arthroscopic) with non-operative treatment (including placebo surgery, exercise or other non-surgical modalities) in adults with patellar tendinopathy.Major outcomes assessed were knee pain, function, quality of life, participant global assessment of success, withdrawal rate, proportion with adverse events and proportion with tendon rupture.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Two review authors selected studies for inclusion, extracted trial characteristics and outcome data, assessed the risk of bias and assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>Two trials (92 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Participants in both trials were followed for 12 months. Neither trial compared surgery to placebo surgery. One trial (40 randomised participants) compared open surgical excision with eccentric exercises, and the other compared arthroscopic surgery with sclerosing injections (52 randomised participants). Due to the nature of the interventions, neither the participants or the investigators were blinded to the group allocation, resulting in the potential for performance and detection bias. Some outcomes were selectively not recorded, leading to reporting bias. Overall, the certainty of the evidence from these studies was low for all outcomes due to the potential for bias, and imprecision due to small sample sizes.Compared with eccentric exercises, low-certainty evidence indicates that open surgical excision provides no clinically important benefits with respect to knee pain, function or global assessment of success. At 12 months, mean knee pain - measured by pain with standing jump on a 10-point scale (lower scores indicating less pain) - was 1.7 points (standard deviation (SD) 1.6) in the eccentric training group and 1.3 (SD 0.8) in the surgical group (one trial, 40 participants). This equates to an absolute pain reduction of 4% (ranging from 4% worse to 12% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 15%) and a relative reduction in pain of 10% better (ranging from 30% better to 10% worse) in the treatment group. At 12 months, function on the zero- to 100-point Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment (VISA) scale was 65.7 (SD 23.8) in the eccentric training group and 72.9 (SD 11.7) in the surgical group (one trial, 40 participants). This equates to an absolute change of 7% better function (ranging from 4% worse to 19% better) and relative change of 25% better (ranging from 15% worse to 65% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 13%). Participant global assessment of success was measured by the number of people with no pain at 12 months: 7/20 participants in the eccentric training group reported no pain, compared with 5/20 in the open surgical group (risk ratio (RR) 0.71 (95% CI 0.27 to 1.88); one trial, 40 participants). There were no withdrawals, but five out of 20 people from the eccentric exercise group crossed over to open surgical excision. Quality of life, adverse events and tendon ruptures were not measured.Compared with sclerosing injection, low-certainty evidence indicates that arthroscopic surgery may provide a reduction in pain and improvement in participant global assessment of success, however further studies are likely to change these results. At 12 months, mean pain with activities, measured on a 100-point scale (lower scores indicating less pain), was 41.1 (SD 28.5) in the sclerosing injection group and 12.8 (SD 19.3) in the arthroscopic surgery group (one trial, 52 participants). This equates to an absolute pain reduction of 28% better (ranging from 15% to 42% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 15%), and a relative change of 41% better (ranging from 21% to 61% better). At 12 months, the mean participant global assessment of success, measured by satisfaction on a 100-point scale (scale zero to 100, higher scores indicating greater satisfaction), was 52.9 (SD 32.6) in the sclerosing injection group and 86.8 (SD 20.8) in the arthroscopic surgery group (one trial, 52 participants). This equates to an absolute improvement of 34% (ranging from 19% to 49%). In both groups, one participant (4%) withdrew from the study. Functional outcome scores, including the VISA score, were not reported. Quality-of-life assessment, adverse events, and specifically the proportion with a tendon rupture, were not reported.We did not perform subgroup analysis to assess differences in outcome between arthroscopic or open surgical excision, as we did not identify more than one study with a common comparator.</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>We are uncertain if surgery is beneficial over other therapeutic interventions, namely eccentric exercises or injectables. Low-certainty evidence shows that surgery for patellar tendinopathy may not provide clinically important benefits over eccentric exercise in terms of pain, function or participant-reported treatment success, but may provide clinically meaningful pain reduction and treatment success when compared with sclerosing injections. However, further research is likely to change these results. The evidence was downgraded two levels due to the small sample sizes and susceptibility to bias. We are uncertain if there are additional risks associated with surgery as study authors failed to report adverse events. Surgery seems to be embedded in clinical practice for late-stage patella tendinopathy, due to exhaustion of other therapeutic methods rather than evidence of benefit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45683,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Industry Competition & Trade\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"CD013034\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6756823/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Industry Competition & Trade\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013034.pub2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Industry Competition & Trade","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013034.pub2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:髌骨肌腱病是一种经常影响运动员的过度使用状况。如果药物和物理疗法不能有效治疗,通常会进行手术。针对这种情况进行的手术类型有所不同。目的评价成人髌骨肌腱病变手术治疗的利与弊。检索方法截至2018年7月17日,我们检索了以下数据库:通过Cochrane图书馆、OVID MEDLINE、OVID Embase、临床试验登记处(www.ClinicalTrials.gov)和WHO试验门户网站(www.who.int/ictrp/en/).SELECTION)检索的Cochrane中央对照试验登记处(Central)纳入了所有比较手术技术(开放或关节镜)与非手术治疗(包括安慰剂手术、运动或其他非手术方式)治疗成人髌骨肌腱病的随机对照试验(RCTs)。评估的主要结局是膝关节疼痛、功能、生活质量、参与者总体成功评估、停药率、不良事件比例和肌腱断裂比例。数据收集和分析两位综述作者选择纳入研究,提取试验特征和结局数据,评估偏倚风险,并使用GRADE评估证据质量。2项试验(92名受试者)符合我们的纳入标准。两项试验的参与者都被随访了12个月。两项试验都没有将手术与安慰剂手术进行比较。一项试验(40名随机受试者)比较开放手术切除与偏心运动,另一项试验比较关节镜手术与硬化注射(52名随机受试者)。由于干预措施的性质,参与者和研究者都没有对组分配盲目,从而导致潜在的表现和检测偏差。有些结果选择性地不记录,导致报告偏倚。总的来说,由于可能存在偏倚,这些研究的证据的确定性对所有结果都很低,而且由于样本量小而不精确。与偏心运动相比,低确定性证据表明,开放性手术切除在膝关节疼痛、功能或整体成功评估方面没有临床上重要的益处。12个月时,偏心训练组的平均膝关节疼痛-以站立跳跃的疼痛为10分制(分数越低表明疼痛越少)-为1.7分(标准差(SD) 1.6),手术组为1.3分(SD 0.8)(一项试验,40名参与者)。这相当于治疗组的绝对疼痛减轻了4%(从减轻4%到减轻12%,最小的临床重要差异为15%),相对疼痛减轻了10%(从减轻30%到减轻10%)。在12个月时,在0到100分的维多利亚运动评估研究所(VISA)量表上,偏心训练组的功能为65.7 (SD 23.8),手术组为72.9 (SD 11.7)(一项试验,40名参与者)。这相当于功能改善的绝对变化为7%(从差4%到好19%),相对变化为25%(从差15%到好65%,最小临床重要差异为13%)。参与者对成功的总体评估是通过12个月时无疼痛的人数来衡量的:7/20的偏心训练组参与者报告没有疼痛,而开放手术组为5/20(风险比(RR) 0.71 (95% CI 0.27至1.88);一项试验,40名参与者)。没有人退出,但在古怪运动组的20人中,有5人进行了开放性手术切除。没有测量生活质量、不良事件和肌腱断裂。与硬化注射相比,低确定性证据表明关节镜手术可能减少疼痛并改善参与者对成功的总体评估,然而进一步的研究可能会改变这些结果。在12个月时,以100分制(分数越低表示疼痛越少)测量的活动平均疼痛在硬化注射组为41.1 (SD 28.5),在关节镜手术组为12.8 (SD 19.3)(一项试验,52名参与者)。这相当于绝对疼痛减轻了28%(范围从15%到42%,最小临床重要差异为15%),相对改变了41%(范围从21%到61%)。在12个月时,参与者总体成功的平均评估,以100分制的满意度来衡量(从0到100,分数越高表明满意度越高),硬化注射组为52.9 (SD 32.6),关节镜手术组为86.8 (SD 20.8)(一项试验,52名参与者)。这相当于34%的绝对改进(范围从19%到49%)。两组均有一名参与者(4%)退出研究。功能结果评分,包括VISA评分,未被报道。 背景介绍髌骨肌腱病是一种常见于运动员的过度劳损性疾病。如果药物和物理疗法无法有效治疗,通常会进行手术治疗。针对该病症实施的手术类型存在差异:评估手术治疗成人髌骨肌腱病的利弊:截至2018年7月17日,我们检索了以下数据库:通过Cochrane图书馆检索的Cochrane对照试验中央注册中心(CENTRAL)、OVID MEDLINE、OVID Embase、临床试验注册中心(www.ClinicalTrials.gov)和世界卫生组织试验门户网站(www.who.int/ictrp/en/)。筛选标准:我们纳入了所有随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验比较了髌骨肌腱病成人患者的手术技术(开刀或关节镜手术)与非手术治疗(包括安慰剂手术、锻炼或其他非手术方式)。评估的主要结果包括膝关节疼痛、功能、生活质量、参与者对成功的总体评价、退出率、出现不良事件的比例以及肌腱断裂的比例:两位综述作者选择了纳入研究,提取了试验特征和结果数据,评估了偏倚风险,并使用 GRADE 评估了证据质量:两项试验(92 名参与者)符合我们的纳入标准。两项试验的参与者均接受了为期12个月的随访。两项试验均未对手术与安慰剂手术进行比较。一项试验(40 名随机参与者)比较了开放性手术切除与偏心运动,另一项试验比较了关节镜手术与硬化剂注射(52 名随机参与者)。由于干预措施的性质,参与者或研究人员对组别分配均不设盲区,因此可能会出现表现和检测偏倚。有些结果被选择性地记录下来,导致报告偏差。总体而言,这些研究中所有结果的证据确定性均较低,原因是可能存在偏倚,且样本量较小导致证据不精确。与偏心运动相比,低确定性证据表明,开放性手术切除术在膝关节疼痛、功能或总体成功评估方面并无临床意义。12个月后,膝关节疼痛的平均值--以站立跳动时的疼痛为衡量标准,采用10分制(得分越低表示疼痛越轻)--偏心训练组为1.7分(标准差(SD)1.6),手术组为1.3分(SD 0.8)(一项试验,40名参与者)。这相当于治疗组的疼痛绝对值减少了 4%(从恶化 4% 到改善 12%,最小临床意义差异为 15%),疼痛相对值减少了 10%(从改善 30% 到恶化 10%)。12 个月后,在维多利亚体育评估研究所(VISA)的零至 100 分量表中,偏心训练组的功能为 65.7(标准差 23.8),手术组为 72.9(标准差 11.7)(一项试验,40 名参与者)。这相当于功能改善了 7% 的绝对变化(从差 4% 到好 19%)和 25% 的相对变化(从差 15% 到好 65%,最小临床重要性差异为 13%)。参与者对成功的总体评估是通过 12 个月后无疼痛的人数来衡量的:偏心训练组有 7/20 人报告无疼痛,而开放手术组只有 5/20 人报告无疼痛(风险比 (RR) 0.71 (95% CI 0.27 至 1.88);一项试验,40 名参与者)。没有人退出,但偏心运动组的 20 人中有 5 人转为开放手术切除。与硬化剂注射相比,低确定性证据表明关节镜手术可减轻疼痛并改善参与者对手术成功的总体评价,但进一步的研究可能会改变这些结果。12 个月后,硬化剂注射组的平均活动疼痛程度为 41.1(标准差 28.5),关节镜手术组为 12.8(标准差 19.3)(一项试验,52 名参与者)。这相当于疼痛的绝对减轻率提高了 28%(从 15% 到 42% 不等,最小临床重要性差异为 15%),相对减轻率提高了 41%(从 21% 到 61% 不等)。在 12 个月时,根据 100 分制的满意度(从 0 到 100 分,分数越高表示越满意)来衡量,硬化剂注射组的平均成功率为 52.9(标准差为 32.6),关节镜手术组的平均成功率为 86.8(标准差为 20.8)(一项试验,52 名参与者)。这相当于34%的绝对改善率(从19%到49%不等)。两组中均有一名参与者(4%)退出研究。包括VISA评分在内的功能结果评分未作报告。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Surgery for patellar tendinopathy (jumper's knee).

Background: Patellar tendinopathy is an overuse condition that commonly affects athletes. Surgery is usually offered if medical and physical therapies fail to treat it effectively. There is variation in the type of surgery performed for the condition.

Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of surgery for patellar tendinopathy in adults.

Search methods: We searched the following databases, to 17 July 2018: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Library, OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, clinical trial registries (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) and the WHO trials portal (www.who.int/ictrp/en/).

Selection criteria: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared surgical techniques (open or arthroscopic) with non-operative treatment (including placebo surgery, exercise or other non-surgical modalities) in adults with patellar tendinopathy.Major outcomes assessed were knee pain, function, quality of life, participant global assessment of success, withdrawal rate, proportion with adverse events and proportion with tendon rupture.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors selected studies for inclusion, extracted trial characteristics and outcome data, assessed the risk of bias and assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

Main results: Two trials (92 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Participants in both trials were followed for 12 months. Neither trial compared surgery to placebo surgery. One trial (40 randomised participants) compared open surgical excision with eccentric exercises, and the other compared arthroscopic surgery with sclerosing injections (52 randomised participants). Due to the nature of the interventions, neither the participants or the investigators were blinded to the group allocation, resulting in the potential for performance and detection bias. Some outcomes were selectively not recorded, leading to reporting bias. Overall, the certainty of the evidence from these studies was low for all outcomes due to the potential for bias, and imprecision due to small sample sizes.Compared with eccentric exercises, low-certainty evidence indicates that open surgical excision provides no clinically important benefits with respect to knee pain, function or global assessment of success. At 12 months, mean knee pain - measured by pain with standing jump on a 10-point scale (lower scores indicating less pain) - was 1.7 points (standard deviation (SD) 1.6) in the eccentric training group and 1.3 (SD 0.8) in the surgical group (one trial, 40 participants). This equates to an absolute pain reduction of 4% (ranging from 4% worse to 12% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 15%) and a relative reduction in pain of 10% better (ranging from 30% better to 10% worse) in the treatment group. At 12 months, function on the zero- to 100-point Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment (VISA) scale was 65.7 (SD 23.8) in the eccentric training group and 72.9 (SD 11.7) in the surgical group (one trial, 40 participants). This equates to an absolute change of 7% better function (ranging from 4% worse to 19% better) and relative change of 25% better (ranging from 15% worse to 65% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 13%). Participant global assessment of success was measured by the number of people with no pain at 12 months: 7/20 participants in the eccentric training group reported no pain, compared with 5/20 in the open surgical group (risk ratio (RR) 0.71 (95% CI 0.27 to 1.88); one trial, 40 participants). There were no withdrawals, but five out of 20 people from the eccentric exercise group crossed over to open surgical excision. Quality of life, adverse events and tendon ruptures were not measured.Compared with sclerosing injection, low-certainty evidence indicates that arthroscopic surgery may provide a reduction in pain and improvement in participant global assessment of success, however further studies are likely to change these results. At 12 months, mean pain with activities, measured on a 100-point scale (lower scores indicating less pain), was 41.1 (SD 28.5) in the sclerosing injection group and 12.8 (SD 19.3) in the arthroscopic surgery group (one trial, 52 participants). This equates to an absolute pain reduction of 28% better (ranging from 15% to 42% better, the minimal clinically important difference being 15%), and a relative change of 41% better (ranging from 21% to 61% better). At 12 months, the mean participant global assessment of success, measured by satisfaction on a 100-point scale (scale zero to 100, higher scores indicating greater satisfaction), was 52.9 (SD 32.6) in the sclerosing injection group and 86.8 (SD 20.8) in the arthroscopic surgery group (one trial, 52 participants). This equates to an absolute improvement of 34% (ranging from 19% to 49%). In both groups, one participant (4%) withdrew from the study. Functional outcome scores, including the VISA score, were not reported. Quality-of-life assessment, adverse events, and specifically the proportion with a tendon rupture, were not reported.We did not perform subgroup analysis to assess differences in outcome between arthroscopic or open surgical excision, as we did not identify more than one study with a common comparator.

Authors' conclusions: We are uncertain if surgery is beneficial over other therapeutic interventions, namely eccentric exercises or injectables. Low-certainty evidence shows that surgery for patellar tendinopathy may not provide clinically important benefits over eccentric exercise in terms of pain, function or participant-reported treatment success, but may provide clinically meaningful pain reduction and treatment success when compared with sclerosing injections. However, further research is likely to change these results. The evidence was downgraded two levels due to the small sample sizes and susceptibility to bias. We are uncertain if there are additional risks associated with surgery as study authors failed to report adverse events. Surgery seems to be embedded in clinical practice for late-stage patella tendinopathy, due to exhaustion of other therapeutic methods rather than evidence of benefit.

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
3.10
自引率
5.30%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade (JICT) publishes research on the microeconomic foundations of industrial strategy, innovation, competition, and trade policy, concentrating on the functioning of markets for goods and services. The journal’s primary aim is to bridge the gaps between economic theory, empirical analysis and economic policy, and to provide a forum for applied theoretical research on policy questions. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade promotes the combination of theories with facts, and encourages the incorporation of facts into model building. focuses on using applied theoretical research to arrive at policy conclusions, and encourages researchers to investigate policy questions. For example, game theoretical models that analyse the sources of and obstacles to innovation, the functioning of markets or strategic interactions are combined with empirical facts; and supporting empirical analysis is provided for models that explain how institutions, consumers and firms interact, how they shape their environment, and how incentives influence behaviour. Papers that analyse institutions and policy measures are expected to make explicit reference to theoretical models, while theoretical work is expected to include the analysis of empirical implications.   The journal serves as a forum for dialogue between economists from academia and (national or international) policy circles. The composition of the Editorial Board, which includes academics as well as leading economists working at governmental and international organizations, facilitates exchanges between academia and economic policy. Officially cited as: J Ind Compet Trade
×
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