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.
Br J Sports Med. 2016 Jun;50(12):716-24. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-094948. Epub 2016 Jan 25.
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.
Systematic review and meta-analysis
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.
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.
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.
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.
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。
系统评价和荟萃分析。
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。
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%)。
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。