Suppr超能文献

创伤性半月板撕裂的处理:2019 年 ESSKA 半月板共识。

Management of traumatic meniscus tears: the 2019 ESSKA meniscus consensus.

机构信息

Center of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Hochstr. 29, 14770, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany.

Orthopaedics Department, Centre Hospitalier de Versailles, Le Chesnay, France.

出版信息

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020 Apr;28(4):1177-1194. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-05847-3. Epub 2020 Feb 13.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The importance of meniscus integrity in the prevention of early osteoarthritis is well known, and preservation is accepted as the primary goal. The purpose of the ESSKA (European Society for Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy) European consensus on traumatic meniscus tears was to provide recommendations for the treatment of meniscus tears based on both scientific evidence and the clinical experience of knee experts.

METHODS

Three groups of surgeons and scientists elaborated and ratified the so-called formal consensus process to define the recommendations for the management of traumatic meniscus tears. A traumatic meniscus tear was defined as a tear with an acute onset of symptoms caused by a sufficient trauma. The expert groups included a steering group of eight European surgeons and scientists, a rating group of another nineteen European surgeons, and a peer review group. The steering group prepared twenty-seven question and answer sets based on the scientific literature. The quality of the answers received grades of A (a high level of scientific support), B (scientific presumption), C (a low level of scientific support) or D (expert opinion). These question and answer sets were then submitted to and evaluated by the rating group. All answers were scored from 1 (= totally inappropriate) to 9 (= totally appropriate) points. Thereafter, the comments of the members of the rating group were incorporated by the steering group and the consensus was submitted to the rating group a second time. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the finalized question and answer sets were submitted for final review by the peer review group composed of representatives of the ESSKA-affiliated national societies. Eighteen representatives replied.

RESULTS

The review of the literature revealed a rather low scientific quality of studies examining the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears. Of the 27 questions, only one question received a grade of A (a high level of scientific support), and another received a grade of B (scientific presumption). The remaining questions received grades of C and D. The mean rating of all questions by the rating group was 8.2 (95% confidence interval 8.1-8.4). A general agreement that MRI should be performed on a systematic basis was not achieved. However, MRI was recommended when arthroscopy would be considered to identify concomitant pathologies. In this case, the indication for MRI should be determined by a musculoskeletal specialist. Based on our data, stable left in situ lateral meniscus tears appear to show a better prognosis than medial tears. When repair is required, surgery should be performed as early as possible. Evidence that biological enhancement such as needling or the application of platelet-rich plasma would improve healing was not identified. Preservation of the meniscus should be considered as the first line of treatment because of an inferior clinical and radiological long-term outcome after partial meniscectomy compared to meniscus repair.

DISCUSSION

The consensus was generated to present the best possible recommendations for the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears and provides some groundwork for a clinical decision-making process regarding the treatment of meniscus tears. Preservation of the meniscus should be the first line of treatment when possible, because the clinical and radiological long-term outcomes are worse after partial meniscectomy than after meniscus preservation. The consensus clearly states that numerous meniscus tears that were considered irreparable should be repaired, e.g., older tears, tears in obese patients, long tears, etc. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

摘要

目的

众所周知,半月板完整性在预防早期骨关节炎方面非常重要,因此保留半月板被认为是首要目标。ESSKA(欧洲运动创伤学、膝关节外科和关节镜学会)关于创伤性半月板撕裂的欧洲共识的目的是根据科学证据和膝关节专家的临床经验,为半月板撕裂的治疗提供建议。

方法

三组外科医生和科学家详细阐述并批准了所谓的正式共识过程,以定义创伤性半月板撕裂的管理建议。创伤性半月板撕裂被定义为症状急性发作的撕裂,由足够的创伤引起。专家组包括 8 名欧洲外科医生和科学家组成的指导小组、另外 19 名欧洲外科医生组成的评分小组和同行评审小组。指导小组根据科学文献编写了 27 组问答。收到的答案质量等级为 A(高水平科学支持)、B(科学假设)、C(低水平科学支持)或 D(专家意见)。然后,这些问答集提交给评分小组进行评估。所有答案的得分从 1(完全不合适)到 9(完全合适)。此后,评分小组成员的评论由指导小组纳入,并将共识第二次提交给评分小组。一旦指导小组和评分小组成员达成普遍共识,最终的问答集将提交给由 ESSKA 附属国家协会代表组成的同行评审小组进行最终审查。有 18 名代表回复。

结果

对文献的回顾表明,研究创伤性半月板撕裂治疗的科学质量相当低。在 27 个问题中,只有一个问题获得 A 级(高水平科学支持),另一个问题获得 B 级(科学假设)。其余问题的等级为 C 和 D。评分小组对所有问题的平均评分均为 8.2(95%置信区间 8.1-8.4)。未能就 MRI 应系统进行达成共识。然而,当考虑进行关节镜检查以识别伴随病变时,建议进行 MRI。在这种情况下,应由肌肉骨骼专家确定 MRI 的指征。根据我们的数据,稳定的外侧半月板原位撕裂似乎比内侧撕裂预后更好。当需要修复时,应尽早进行手术。没有发现生物增强(如针刺或富含血小板的血浆应用)会改善愈合的证据。由于半月板部分切除后的临床和影像学长期结果比半月板修复差,因此应将保留半月板视为一线治疗。

讨论

该共识的产生旨在为创伤性半月板撕裂的治疗提供尽可能好的建议,并为半月板撕裂的治疗提供一些临床决策过程的基础。在可能的情况下,应首先保留半月板,因为半月板部分切除后的临床和影像学长期结果比半月板保留差。共识明确指出,许多以前认为无法修复的半月板撕裂应该进行修复,例如,陈旧性撕裂、肥胖患者的撕裂、长撕裂等。

证据水平

II 级。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/01f9/7148286/ea8477f0c885/167_2020_5847_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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