Suppr超能文献

翻修 ACL 重建与初次手术相比如何?一项比较患者报告和临床医生报告的结果以及影像学结果的荟萃分析。

Does revision ACL reconstruction measure up to primary surgery? A meta-analysis comparing patient-reported and clinician-reported outcomes, and radiographic results.

机构信息

II Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.

Aspetar Orthopaedic & Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha, Qatar Division of Physiotherapy, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

Br J Sports Med. 2016 Jun;50(12):716-24. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-094948. Epub 2016 Jan 25.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare patient-reported and clinician-reported outcomes, and radiographic results between patients who had had revision ACL reconstruction and those who had had primary ACL reconstruction.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis

DATA SOURCES

The MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and SPORTDiscus electronic databases were searched on 6 August 2015, using 3 main concepts: (1) revision ACL reconstruction, (2) primary ACL reconstruction and (3) treatment outcomes.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Articles that compared patient-reported or clinician-reported outcomes or radiographic results between patients who had had revision ACL reconstruction and those who had had primary surgery with a minimum of 2 years follow-up were included. The outcomes evaluated were the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) classification, Tegner Activity Scale, side-to-side difference in anterior tibial translation measured with KT-1000/2000 arthrometer, pivot shift test, tibiofemoral osteoarthritis grading on plain radiographs and subsequent knee surgeries.

RESULTS

8 studies (300 revision ACL reconstructions and 413 primary ACL reconstructions) were included in the meta-analysis. Patients who had had revision surgery reported inferior Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale scores (mean difference: 7.8 points), had inferior clinician-reported knee function as assessed with the objective IKDC classification (IKDC category A: 27% vs 57%; IKDC category C or D: 22% vs 8%) and pivot shift test (grade II or III: 7% vs 2%), and more radiographic evidence of tibiofemoral osteoarthritis (50% vs 25%) compared with patients who had had primary surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Revision ACL reconstruction restored similar anterior-posterior knee laxity compared with primary ACL reconstruction. Patients who had had revision surgery reported inferior Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale scores, had inferior clinician-reported knee function and more radiographic signs of tibiofemoral osteoarthritis compared with patients with primary ACL reconstruction.

摘要

目的

比较接受 ACL 翻修重建术和初次 ACL 重建术患者的患者报告结局、临床医生报告结局和影像学结果。

设计

系统评价和荟萃分析。

数据来源

2015 年 8 月 6 日,检索 MEDLINE、CINAHL、EMBASE 和 SPORTDiscus 电子数据库,使用 3 个主要概念:(1)ACL 翻修重建术,(2)初次 ACL 重建术,(3)治疗结局。

纳入研究的选择标准

纳入比较接受 ACL 翻修重建术和初次手术患者(至少 2 年随访)的患者报告结局或临床医生报告结局或影像学结果的文章。评估的结局包括 Lysholm 膝关节评分量表、客观国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)分级、Tegner 活动量表、KT-1000/2000 关节测量仪测量的胫骨前移的侧-侧差值、前抽屉试验、膝关节正位片上的髌股关节炎分级和随后的膝关节手术。

结果

纳入 8 项研究(300 例 ACL 翻修重建术和 413 例初次 ACL 重建术)进行荟萃分析。接受翻修手术的患者报告 Lysholm 膝关节评分量表评分较低(平均差值:7.8 分),临床医生报告的膝关节功能也较差(客观 IKDC 分级 A 级:27%比 57%;IKDC 分级 C 或 D 级:22%比 8%)和前抽屉试验(Ⅱ级或Ⅲ级:7%比 2%),且膝关节正位片上髌股关节炎的放射影像学证据更多(50%比 25%)。

结论

与初次 ACL 重建术相比,ACL 翻修重建术恢复了相似的前后向膝关节松弛度。与初次 ACL 重建术患者相比,接受翻修手术的患者报告 Lysholm 膝关节评分量表评分较低,临床医生报告的膝关节功能较差,膝关节正位片上髌股关节炎的放射影像学证据更多。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验