Suppr超能文献

保守治疗与手术治疗肩袖撕裂患者的比较:系统评价和 META 分析。

Conservative versus surgical management for patients with rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and META-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 200, 00128 Trigoria, Rome, Italy.

Unit of Measurements and Biomedical Instrumentation, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 200, 00128 Trigoria, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Jan 8;22(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s12891-020-03872-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare conservative versus surgical management for patients with full-thickness RC tear in terms of clinical and structural outcomes at 1 and 2 years of follow-up.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Google Scholar and reference lists of retrieved articles was performed since the inception of each database until August 2020. According to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, two independent authors screened all suitable studies for the inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Only randomised controlled trials comparing conservative and surgical management of full-thickness RC tear in adults were included. The primary outcome measure was the effectiveness of each treatment in terms of Constant-Murley score (CMS) and VAS pain score at different time points. The secondary outcome was the integrity of the repaired tendon evaluated on postoperative MRI at different time points. The GRADE guidelines were used to assess the critical appraisal status and quality of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of six articles met the inclusion criteria. The average value of CMS score at 12 months of follow-up was 77.6 ± 14.4 in the surgery group and 72.8 ± 16.5 in the conservative group, without statistically significant differences between the groups. Similar results were demonstrated at 24 months of follow-up. The mean of VAS pain score at 12 months of follow-up was 1.4 ± 1.6 in the surgery group and 2.4 ± 1.9 in the conservative group. Quantitative synthesis showed better results in favour of the surgical group in terms of VAS pain score one year after surgery (- 1.08, 95% CI - 1.58 to - 0.58; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

At a 2-year follow-up, shoulder function evaluated in terms of CMS was not significantly improved. Further high-quality level-I randomised controlled trials at longer term follow-up are needed to evaluate whether surgical and conservative treatment provide comparable long-term results.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在比较全层 RC 撕裂患者的保守治疗与手术治疗在 1 年和 2 年随访时的临床和结构结局。

方法

从每个数据库创建开始到 2020 年 8 月,全面检索了 CENTRAL、MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、Google Scholar 和检索文章的参考文献列表。根据《 Cochrane 系统评价手册》,两名独立作者筛选了所有符合纳入条件的研究,提取数据并评估了偏倚风险。仅纳入比较成人全层 RC 撕裂保守治疗与手术治疗的随机对照试验。主要结局测量指标是两种治疗方法在不同时间点的 Constant-Murley 评分(CMS)和 VAS 疼痛评分的疗效。次要结局是不同时间点术后 MRI 评估修复肌腱的完整性。使用 GRADE 指南评估批判性评价状态和证据质量。

结果

共有 6 篇文章符合纳入标准。手术组 12 个月随访时 CMS 评分的平均值为 77.6±14.4,保守组为 72.8±16.5,两组间无统计学差异。24 个月随访时也得出了类似的结果。手术组 12 个月随访时 VAS 疼痛评分的平均值为 1.4±1.6,保守组为 2.4±1.9。定量综合结果显示,手术组在术后 1 年的 VAS 疼痛评分方面的结果更好(-1.08,95%CI -1.58 至 -0.58;P<0.001)。

结论

在 2 年随访时,CMS 评估的肩部功能没有明显改善。需要进一步进行高质量的、长期随访的 I 级随机对照试验,以评估手术治疗和保守治疗是否提供可比的长期结果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e22a/7796609/b56947090705/12891_2020_3872_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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