Khan Riaz Jk, Carey Smith Richard L
Department of Surgery and Pathology, University of Western Australia, Gate 3 Verdun Street, Nedlands, Perth, Western Australia, Australia, 6009.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Sep 8(9):CD003674. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003674.pub4.
There is a lack of consensus on the best management of the acute Achilles tendon rupture. Treatment can be broadly classified into surgical (open or percutaneous) and non-surgical (cast immobilisation or functional bracing).
To evaluate the relative effects of surgical versus non-surgical treatment, or different surgical interventions, for acute Achilles tendon ruptures in adults.
We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (July 2009), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to 20th July 2009), EMBASE (1966 to 2009 week 29), CINAHL (1983 to July 2007) and reference lists of articles.
All randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing surgical versus non-surgical treatment or different surgical methods for acute Achilles tendon ruptures in adults.
Two review authors independently selected potentially eligible trials; trials were then assessed for quality using a 10-item scale. Where possible, data were pooled.
Twelve trials involving 844 participants were included. One trial tested two comparisons.Quality assessment revealed a poor level of methodological rigour in many studies, particularly with regard to concealment of allocation and the lack of assessor blinding.Open surgical treatment compared with non-surgical treatment (6 trials, 536 participants) was associated with a statistically significant lower risk of rerupture (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 0.77), but a higher risk of other complications including infection (RR 4.89, 95% CI 1.09 to 21.91), adhesions and disturbed skin sensibility (numbness). Functional status including sporting activity was variably and often incompletely reported, including frequent use of non standardised outcome measures, and the results were inconclusive.Open surgical repair compared with percutaneous repair (4 trials, 174 participants) was associated with a higher risk of infection (RR 9.32, 95% CI 1.77 to 49.16). These figures should be interpreted with caution because of the small numbers involved. Similarly, no definitive conclusions could be made regarding different tendon repair techniques (3 trials, 147 participants).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Open surgical treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures significantly reduces the risk of rerupture compared with non-surgical treatment, but produces significantly higher risks of other complications, including wound infection. The latter may be reduced by performing surgery percutaneously.
对于急性跟腱断裂的最佳治疗方法,目前尚无共识。治疗方法大致可分为手术治疗(开放手术或经皮手术)和非手术治疗(石膏固定或功能性支具固定)。
评估手术治疗与非手术治疗或不同手术干预措施对成人急性跟腱断裂的相对疗效。
我们检索了Cochrane骨、关节与肌肉创伤组专业注册库(2009年7月)、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(《Cochrane图书馆》2009年第3期)、MEDLINE(1966年至2009年7月20日)、EMBASE(1966年至2009年第29周)、CINAHL(1983年至2007年7月)以及文章的参考文献列表。
所有比较手术治疗与非手术治疗或不同手术方法治疗成人急性跟腱断裂的随机和半随机试验。
两位综述作者独立筛选潜在符合条件的试验;然后使用10项量表对试验质量进行评估。尽可能合并数据。
纳入了12项试验,涉及844名参与者。一项试验进行了两项比较。质量评估显示,许多研究的方法学严谨性较差,特别是在分配隐藏和缺乏评估者盲法方面。开放手术治疗与非手术治疗相比(6项试验,536名参与者),再断裂风险在统计学上显著降低(风险比(RR)0.41,95%置信区间(CI)0.21至0.77),但其他并发症风险较高,包括感染(RR 4.89,95%CI 1.09至21.91)、粘连和皮肤感觉障碍(麻木)。包括体育活动在内的功能状态报告不一,且往往不完整,包括频繁使用非标准化结局指标,结果尚无定论。开放手术修复与经皮修复相比(4项试验,174名参与者),感染风险较高(RR 9.32,95%CI 1.77至49.16)。由于涉及的病例数较少,这些数据应谨慎解读。同样,对于不同的肌腱修复技术(3项试验,147名参与者),也无法得出明确结论。
与非手术治疗相比,开放手术治疗急性跟腱断裂可显著降低再断裂风险,但会显著增加包括伤口感染在内的其他并发症风险。经皮手术可能会降低后者的风险。