Martin Luther Krankenhaus, Caspar Theyß Str. 27-31, 14193, Berlin, Germany.
Orthopädische Gemeinschaftspraxis Neuss, Neuss, Germany.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019 Mar;27(3):782-796. doi: 10.1007/s00167-018-5086-0. Epub 2018 Aug 20.
The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of prospective randomized controlled trials comparing arthroscopic treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA) with either other therapeutic interventions or sham treatment.
A systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCT) about arthroscopic treatment (AT) for knee OA was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Arthroscopic treatment included procedures such as lavage, debridement and partial meniscectomy of the knee. Data source was PubMed central.
Fourteen articles could be included. Five studies compared interventive AT with either sham surgery, lavage or diagnostic arthroscopy. Nine trials compared AT with another active intervention (exercise, steroid injection, hyaluronic acid injection). In ten trials, the clinical scores improved after arthroscopic treatment of knee OA in comparison to the baseline. In seven trials, there was a significant difference in the final clinical outcome with higher scores for patients after arthroscopic OA treatment in comparison to a control group. In four trials, the intention to treat analysis revealed no significant difference between arthroscopic OA treatment and the control group. In one of those trials, which compared arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) with exercise, the cross over rate from exercise to AT was 34.9%. The clinical scores of cross-over patients improved after APM. In one study, the subgroup analysis revealed that patients with tears of the anterior two-thirds of the medial meniscus or any lateral meniscus tear had a higher probability of improvement after arthroscopic surgery than did patients with other intraarticular pathology. There was no difference in the side effects between patients with AT and the control group. Despite acceptable scores in the methodological quality assessment, significant flaws could be found in all studies. These flaws include bad description of the exact surgical technique or poor control of postoperative use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID).
Results of RCTs comparing AT with other treatment options were heterogeneous. AT in OA patients is not useless because there is evidence that a subgroup of patients with non-traumatic flap tears of the medial meniscus or patients with crystal arthropathy benefit from arthroscopy. This topic has a high relevance because several health insurances do not reimburse arthroscopy for patients with OA anymore. The results of these randomized studies, however, should be interpreted with care because in many studies, the use of other therapeutic variables such as pain killers or NSAIDs was not controlled or reported.
I.
本研究旨在对比较关节镜治疗膝关节骨关节炎(OA)与其他治疗干预或假手术的前瞻性随机对照试验进行系统评价。
根据 PRISMA 指南,对关节镜治疗(AT)膝关节 OA 的随机对照试验(RCT)进行系统搜索。关节镜治疗包括膝关节冲洗、清创和部分半月板切除术等操作。数据来源为 PubMed 中心。
共纳入 14 篇文章。5 项研究比较了干预性 AT 与假手术、冲洗或诊断性关节镜检查。9 项试验比较了 AT 与另一种积极干预(运动、类固醇注射、透明质酸注射)。在 10 项试验中,与基线相比,关节镜治疗膝 OA 后临床评分得到改善。在 7 项试验中,关节镜 OA 治疗组与对照组在最终临床结局方面存在显著差异,关节镜 OA 治疗组患者的评分更高。在 4 项试验中,意向治疗分析显示,关节镜 OA 治疗组与对照组之间无显著差异。在一项比较关节镜部分半月板切除术(APM)与运动的试验中,从运动到 AT 的交叉率为 34.9%。交叉患者的临床评分在 APM 后得到改善。在一项研究中,亚组分析显示,内侧半月板前 2/3 撕裂或任何外侧半月板撕裂的患者在接受关节镜手术后改善的可能性高于其他关节内病变的患者。AT 组与对照组之间的副作用无差异。尽管在方法学质量评估中获得了可接受的分数,但所有研究中仍存在明显的缺陷。这些缺陷包括对确切手术技术的描述不佳或对术后非甾体抗炎药(NSAID)使用的控制不佳。
比较 AT 与其他治疗选择的 RCT 结果存在异质性。AT 对 OA 患者并非无用,因为有证据表明,内侧半月板非创伤性瓣状撕裂或晶体性关节炎患者亚组从关节镜中获益。这个话题具有很高的相关性,因为一些健康保险不再为 OA 患者报销关节镜。然而,由于在许多研究中,未控制或报告其他治疗变量(如止痛药或 NSAID)的使用,因此应谨慎解释这些随机研究的结果。
I。