Suppr超能文献

单束与双束重建后交叉韧带(PCL):一项荟萃分析。

Single versus double bundle in posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction: a meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic, Trauma, and Reconstructive Surgery, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, 52074, Aachen, Germany.

Department of Orthopaedics, Surgery and Dentistry, University of Salerno, 84081, Baronissi, SA, Italy.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2022 Mar 9;12(1):4160. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-07976-w.

Abstract

Posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction can be performed using single bundle (SB) and double bundle (DB) techniques. The present study investigated whether DB PCL reconstruction is superior to SB reconstruction in terms of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and joint stability. In December 2021 Embase, Google Scholar, Pubmed, Scopus databases were accessed. All clinical trials comparing SB versus DB reconstruction to address PCL insufficiency in skeletally mature patients were considered. Data from 483 procedures were retrieved. The mean follow-up was 31.0 (28.0 to 107.6) months, and the mean timespan between injury and surgery was 11.3 (6 to 37) months. The mean age of the patients was 29.3 ± 3.8 years. 85 of 483 patients (18%) were women. At a mean of 31.0 months post reconstruction, ROM (P = 0.03) was slightly greater in the SB group, while the Tegner score (P = 0.03) and the Telos stress (P = 0.04) were more favorable in the DB cohort. Similarity was found in instrumental laxity (P = 0.4) and Lysholm score (P = 0.3). The current evidence does not support the use of DB techniques for PCL reconstruction. Both methods could restore knee stability and motion with satisfactory short term patient reported outcome measures. Further high quality clinical trials are required to validate these results on a larger scale.

摘要

后交叉韧带(PCL)重建可采用单束(SB)和双束(DB)技术。本研究旨在探讨在患者报告的结局测量(PROMs)和关节稳定性方面,DB PCL 重建是否优于 SB 重建。2021 年 12 月,检索了 Embase、Google Scholar、PubMed、Scopus 数据库。纳入了比较 SB 与 DB 重建治疗成熟骨骼患者 PCL 不足的所有临床试验。共检索到 483 例手术的资料。平均随访时间为 31.0(28.0 至 107.6)个月,损伤与手术之间的平均时间间隔为 11.3(6 至 37)个月。患者的平均年龄为 29.3±3.8 岁,85/483 例(18%)为女性。在重建后 31.0 个月的平均随访时,SB 组的 ROM(P=0.03)稍大,而 DB 组的 Tegner 评分(P=0.03)和 Telos 应力(P=0.04)更优。在仪器松弛度(P=0.4)和 Lysholm 评分(P=0.3)方面无显著差异。目前的证据不支持 DB 技术用于 PCL 重建。两种方法都可以恢复膝关节稳定性和运动,具有满意的短期患者报告的结局测量。需要进一步开展高质量的临床试验,以更大规模验证这些结果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/739d/8907238/1e1f98e8f837/41598_2022_7976_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