Suppr超能文献

关节镜下踝关节融合术与开放式踝关节融合术的系统评价。

Arthroscopic Versus Open Ankle Arthrodesis: A Systematic Review.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan-si, Republic of Korea.

Institute for Evidence-based Medicine, Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Arthroscopy. 2018 Mar;34(3):988-997. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2017.08.284. Epub 2017 Nov 6.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review comparing the clinical scores, union rate, complications, reoperations, hospital stay, and operation time between open ankle arthrodesis (OAA) and arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis (AAA).

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Only comparative studies were included in this meta-analysis. The literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted by 2 independent reviewers. The outcomes analyzed included clinical scores, union rate, complications, reoperations, hospital stay, operation time, and intraoperative blood loss.

RESULTS

A total of 7 retrospective comparative studies were included in this systematic review. Clinical scores were noted in 3 studies. The American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society ankle-hindfoot score and the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale score were better in the AAA group than in the OAA group. The union rate was similar between the OAA (70%-100%) and AAA (76.2%-100%) groups. The complication rate was higher in the OAA group (6.7%-47.1%) than in the AAA group (0%-23.8%) in 6 studies. The reoperation rate was similar between the OAA (0%-26.5%) and AAA (0%-27.6%) groups. The hospital stay was shorter in the AAA group in 6 studies. Among the 5 studies that reported operation time, 4 reported no significant difference. Two studies showed that intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in the AAA group.

CONCLUSIONS

AAA was shown to offer the advantages of better clinical scores, fewer complications, a shorter hospital stay, and less blood loss compared with OAA. However, the union rate, reoperation rate, and operation time were similar overall between the 2 groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review of Level III studies.

摘要

目的

系统评价比较开放式踝关节融合术(OAA)和关节镜下踝关节融合术(AAA)的临床评分、融合率、并发症、再次手术、住院时间和手术时间。

方法

我们在 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库中进行了全面搜索。只有比较研究被纳入本 meta 分析。文献搜索、数据提取和质量评估由 2 名独立评审员进行。分析的结果包括临床评分、融合率、并发症、再次手术、住院时间、手术时间和术中失血量。

结果

本系统评价共纳入 7 项回顾性比较研究。3 项研究记录了临床评分。AAA 组的美国矫形足踝协会踝关节-后足评分和踝关节骨关节炎评分优于 OAA 组。OAA 组(70%-100%)和 AAA 组(76.2%-100%)的融合率相似。6 项研究中,OAA 组(6.7%-47.1%)的并发症发生率高于 AAA 组(0%-23.8%)。OAA 组(0%-26.5%)和 AAA 组(0%-27.6%)的再次手术率相似。6 项研究中,AAA 组的住院时间更短。在报告手术时间的 5 项研究中,有 4 项报告无显著差异。有两项研究表明,AAA 组术中失血量明显较少。

结论

与 OAA 相比,AAA 具有更好的临床评分、更少的并发症、更短的住院时间和更少的失血的优势。然而,两组的融合率、再次手术率和手术时间总体相似。

证据水平

III 级,III 级研究的系统评价。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验