Plastow Ricci, Kerkhoffs Gino M M J, Wood David, Paton Bruce M, Kayani Babar, Pollock Noel, Court Nick, Giakoumis Michael, Head Paul, Kelly Sam, Moore James, Moriarty Peter, Murphy Simon, Read Paul, Stirling Ben, Tulloch Laura, van Dyk Nicol, Wilson Mathew, Haddad Fares
Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Sports Medicin, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Br J Sports Med. 2023 Mar;57(5):266-277. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2021-105383. Epub 2023 Jan 17.
The key indications for surgical repair of hamstring injuries (HSIs) remain unclear in the literature due to a lack of high-level evidence and expert knowledge. The 2020 London International Hamstring Consensus meeting aimed to highlight clear surgical indications and to create a foundation for future research. A literature review was conducted followed by a modified Delphi process, with an international expert panel. Purposive sampling was used with two rounds of online questionnaires and an intermediate round involving a consensus meeting. The initial information gathering (round 1) questionnaire was sent to 46 international experts, which comprised open-ended questions covering decision-making domains in HSI. Thematic analysis of responses outlined key domains, which were evaluated by a smaller international subgroup (n=15) comprising clinical academic sports medicine physicians, physiotherapists and orthopaedic surgeons in a consensus meeting. After group discussion of each domain, a series of consensus statements were prepared, debated and refined. A round 2 questionnaire was sent to 112 international hamstring experts to vote on these statements and determine level of agreement. The consensus threshold was set a priori at 70% agreement. Rounds 1 and 2 survey respondents were 35/46 (76%) and 99/112 (88.4%), respectively. The consensus group agreed that the indications for operative intervention included: gapping at the zone of tendinous injury (87.2% agreement) and loss of tension (70.7%); symptomatic displaced bony avulsions (72.8%); and proximal free tendon injuries with functional compromise refractory to non-operative treatment (72.2%). Other important considerations for operative intervention included: the demands of the athlete/patient and the expected functional outcome (87.1%) based on the anatomy of the injury; the risk of functional loss/performance deficit with non-operative management (72.2%); and the capacity to restore anatomy and function (87.1%). Further research is needed to determine whether surgery can reduce the risk of reinjury as consensus was not reached within the whole group (48.2%) but was agreed by surgeons (70%) in the cohort. The consensus group did not support the use of corticosteroids or endoscopic surgery without further evidence. These guidelines will help standardise treatment of HSIs, specifically the indications and decision-making for surgical intervention.
由于缺乏高级别证据和专业知识,文献中关于腘绳肌损伤(HSIs)手术修复的关键指征仍不明确。2020年伦敦国际腘绳肌共识会议旨在明确手术指征,并为未来研究奠定基础。会议先进行了文献综述,随后与一个国际专家小组开展了改良德尔菲法。采用目的抽样法,进行两轮在线问卷调查,并开展一轮涉及共识会议的中间环节。第一轮初始信息收集问卷发送给了46位国际专家,其中包含涵盖腘绳肌损伤决策领域的开放式问题。对回复进行主题分析,梳理出关键领域,由一个较小的国际子组(n = 15)在共识会议上进行评估,该子组包括临床学术运动医学医生、物理治疗师和骨科医生。在对每个领域进行小组讨论后,准备了一系列共识声明,并进行辩论和完善。第二轮问卷发送给了112位国际腘绳肌专家,让他们对这些声明进行投票并确定同意程度。事先设定的共识阈值为70%的同意率。第一轮和第二轮调查的回复率分别为35/46(76%)和99/112(88.4%)。共识小组一致认为,手术干预的指征包括:肌腱损伤区域出现间隙(同意率87.2%)和张力丧失(70.7%);有症状的移位性骨撕脱(72.8%);以及近端游离肌腱损伤且非手术治疗难以改善功能(72.2%)。手术干预的其他重要考虑因素包括:基于损伤解剖结构的运动员/患者需求和预期功能结果(87.1%);非手术治疗导致功能丧失/运动表现下降的风险(72.2%);以及恢复解剖结构和功能的能力(87.1%)。由于整个小组未达成共识(48.2%),但队列中的外科医生达成了共识(70%),因此需要进一步研究以确定手术是否可以降低再次受伤的风险。在没有进一步证据的情况下,共识小组不支持使用皮质类固醇或内镜手术。这些指南将有助于规范腘绳肌损伤的治疗,特别是手术干预的指征和决策。