Suppr超能文献

髌股内侧支持带重建术中髌前锚钉固定移植物与经髌腱隧道移植物治疗复发性髌骨脱位的比较:一项荟萃分析比较研究的方案。

Comparison of patellar anchor fixation graft and graft through patellar tunnel reconstruction of medial patellofemoral ligament in the treatment of recurrent patellar dislocation: A protocol for a meta-analysis of comparative studies.

机构信息

Youyang Hospital, A Branch of The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing City, China.

Kunming Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Kunming City, China.

出版信息

Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Jan 20;102(3):e32467. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032467.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recurrent patellar dislocation (RPD) occurs in people who have their own patellofemoral dysplasia and who have not been properly treated after their first patellar dislocation. For RPD where conservative treatment is ineffective, medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction is the first choice for surgical treatment, but there are various and controversial ways of MPFL reconstruction and fixation. Initially, more scholars adopted the patellar lateral tunneling (PT) approach to contain and stabilize the graft, but with the newer materials and techniques, some experts adopted the lateral patellar anchor fixation (AF) of the graft, which can avoid the collateral damage caused by the patellar lateral tunneling and can obtain the same definite efficacy. Therefore, a meta-analysis must be performed to provide evidence whether there is a difference between AF and PT reconstruction of the MPFL in the treatment of RPD.

METHODS

We will search, with no time restriction, without any restriction of language and status, the time from the establishment of the database to October 2022, on the following databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data (WF), Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP), and Chinese databases SinoMed (CBM) electronic databases. The electronic database search will be supplemented by a manual search of the reference lists of included articles. We will apply the risk-of-bias tool of the Cochrane Collaboration for randomized controlled trials to assess the methodological quality. Risk-of-Bias Assessment Tool for Non-randomized Studies was used to evaluate the quality of comparative studies. Statistical analysis will be conducted using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

This systematic review and meta-analysis will evaluate the functional outcomes of the two fixation modalities, AF and PT, in reconstructing MPFL for RPD.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study will provide a basis for clinical judgment of whether there is a difference between the two forms of AF and PT reconstructed MPFL for RPD.

摘要

背景

复发性髌骨脱位(RPD)发生在有髌骨股骨发育不良且初次髌骨脱位后未得到适当治疗的人群中。对于保守治疗无效的 RPD,内侧髌股韧带(MPFL)重建是首选的手术治疗方法,但 MPFL 重建和固定的方法有很多且存在争议。最初,更多的学者采用髌骨外侧隧道(PT)入路来包含和稳定移植物,但随着新材料和新技术的出现,一些专家采用了外侧髌骨锚定固定(AF)的移植物,这可以避免髌骨外侧隧道引起的侧副损伤,并能获得相同的明确疗效。因此,必须进行荟萃分析,以提供证据,证明在治疗 RPD 中,AF 和 PT 重建 MPFL 是否存在差异。

方法

我们将不设时间限制,不限制语言和状态,从数据库建立到 2022 年 10 月,在以下数据库中进行搜索:PubMed(MEDLINE)、Cochrane 中央对照试验注册库(CENTRAL)、Web of Science、中国国家知识基础设施(CNKI)、万方数据(WF)、中国科学期刊数据库(VIP)和中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)电子数据库。电子数据库搜索将辅以纳入文献的参考文献列表的手动搜索。我们将使用 Cochrane 协作的随机对照试验风险偏倚工具来评估方法学质量。非随机研究的风险偏倚评估工具用于评估比较研究的质量。统计分析将使用 RevMan 5.4 软件进行。

结果

本系统评价和荟萃分析将评估两种固定方式(AF 和 PT)在 RPD 中重建 MPFL 的功能结果。

结论

本研究的结果将为临床判断 RPD 中两种形式的 AF 和 PT 重建的 MPFL 是否存在差异提供依据。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7217/9857251/f7046073c931/medi-102-e32467-g001.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