New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021 Nov;29(11):3854-3863. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-06416-4. Epub 2021 Jan 23.
The purpose of the current study is to systematically review and network meta-analyze the current evidence in the literature to ascertain if there is a superior lateral extra-articular augmentation technique in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACL.R) with respect to knee stability, re-rupture rates and functional outcomes.
The literature search was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines. Cohort studies comparing ACL.R to ACL.R + lateral extra-articular augmentation were included. Lateral extra-articular techniques included were anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALL.R), Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, Losee, Maraccaci, and McIntosh. Clinical outcomes were compared between ACL.R alone and the different lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-Score.
Twenty-eight studies with a total of 2990 patients were included. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold technique had the highest P-Score for ACL re-ruptures and residual pivot-shift. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, and ALL.R all significantly reduced the rate of ACL re-rupture, and residual pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. There was no significant difference between any of the lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques and ACL.R alone. ALL.R had the highest P-Score for return to play, and return to play at pre-injury level.
This study established that ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire and ALL.R resulted in significantly lower ipsilateral ACL re-ruptures, as well as reduced pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. Whereas, the other lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques did not reduce pivot-shift and re-rupture. Additionally, functional outcomes and return to play were comparable between those who underwent ACL.R and lateral extra-articular augmentation and ACL.R alone.
III.
本研究旨在系统回顾和网状荟萃分析当前文献中的证据,以确定在膝关节稳定性、再断裂率和功能结果方面,与前交叉韧带(ACL)重建(ACL.R)联合使用的外侧关节外增强技术是否具有优势。
文献检索按照 PRISMA 指南进行。纳入了比较 ACL.R 与 ACL.R+外侧关节外增强的队列研究。纳入的外侧关节外技术包括前外侧韧带重建(ALL.R)、Cocker-Arnold、Lemaire、Losee、Maraccaci 和 McIntosh。使用基于频率的网络荟萃分析对 ACL.R 单独与不同外侧关节外增强技术之间的临床结果进行比较,使用 R 进行统计分析。使用 P-评分对治疗方案进行排名。
共纳入 28 项研究,总计 2990 例患者。ACL.R+Cocker-Arnold 技术在 ACL 再断裂和残余旋转不稳定方面的 P-评分最高。与 ACL.R 单独相比,ACL.R+Cocker-Arnold、Lemaire 和 ALL.R 均显著降低了 ACL 再断裂和残余旋转不稳定的发生率。任何外侧关节外增强技术与 ACL.R 单独相比均无显著差异。ALL.R 在重返赛场和重返受伤前运动水平方面的 P-评分最高。
本研究表明,与 ACL.R 单独相比,ACL.R+Cocker-Arnold、Lemaire 和 ALL.R 可显著降低同侧 ACL 再断裂率,并减少旋转不稳定。而其他外侧关节外增强技术并未降低旋转不稳定和再断裂的发生率。此外,接受 ACL.R 和外侧关节外增强与 ACL.R 单独治疗的患者在功能结果和重返赛场方面无差异。
III。