Nabiyev Ergali, Baizakov Arnat, Kashikova Khadisha, Askerov Ramazan, Baubekov Zhenisbek, Argynbayev Zhassulan, Baikubesov Kuanysh
KazNMU named S.D. Asfendiyarov.
Kazakhstan's Medikal University "KSPH".
Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2023 Nov 11;37:120. doi: 10.47176/mjiri.37.120. eCollection 2023.
Meniscal injury is a common problem that can lead to knee pain and dysfunction. Meniscal repair and meniscectomy are two treatment approaches for meniscal injury, but the latter may increase the risk of osteoarthritis. We aimed to compare the 3-year outcomes of a new method of meniscal suturing with meniscectomy among patients with meniscal injury.
This retrospective cohort study compared meniscal repair (treatment group) and meniscectomy (control group) in patients with meniscal injury. We evaluated the outcomes of 134 patients. under treatment with these approaches based on the Lysholm scale, which measures knee function and symptoms. The study used the chi-square test and the Mann-Whitney U test to compare the proportion of patients with different outcomes and the Lysholm scale scores between the treatment and control groups. The study also conducted subgroup analyses based on gender and age using the Mann-Whitney U test. The level of significance was set at < 0.05 for all statistical tests.
The treatment group had a higher proportion of patients with excellent results, although the difference was not statistically significant (17.2% in the treatment group vs. 10.0% in the control group, = 0.223). However, a comparative analysis of the proportion of patients with good results revealed statistically significant differences, with 67.2% of patients in the treatment group achieving good outcomes compared to 45.7% in the control group (χ2 = 6,256, df = 1 = 0.012, HR 1,470 95%CI 1,081-1,999). The average score on the Lysholm scale was significantly higher in the treatment group (87.48, 95% CI 85.1-89.7, SD = 9.2) compared to the control group (81.73, 95% CI 78.4-84.9, SD = 13.7) (U = 1609, Z = -2.813, = 0.005). Subgroup analyses based on gender and age also showed significant differences in the Lysholm scale scores.
The study demonstrates that meniscal repair is more effective than meniscectomy in improving patient outcomes, with a higher proportion of patients achieving excellent and good results and higher scores on the Lysholm scale. These findings support the use of meniscal repair as a preferred treatment approach for patients with meniscal injuries.
半月板损伤是一个常见问题，可导致膝关节疼痛和功能障碍。半月板修复术和半月板切除术是治疗半月板损伤的两种方法，但后者可能会增加骨关节炎的风险。我们旨在比较半月板损伤患者中一种新的半月板缝合方法与半月板切除术的3年治疗效果。
这项回顾性队列研究比较了半月板损伤患者的半月板修复术（治疗组）和半月板切除术（对照组）。我们评估了134例接受这些治疗方法的患者的治疗效果。采用Lysholm量表评估膝关节功能和症状。本研究使用卡方检验和曼-惠特尼U检验比较治疗组和对照组不同治疗效果患者的比例以及Lysholm量表评分。该研究还使用曼-惠特尼U检验按性别和年龄进行亚组分析。所有统计检验的显著性水平设定为<0.05。
治疗组中治疗效果优秀的患者比例更高，尽管差异无统计学意义（治疗组为17.2%，对照组为10.0%；P = 0.223）。然而，对治疗效果良好的患者比例进行比较分析发现存在统计学显著差异；治疗组67.2% 的患者取得了良好的治疗效果；相比之下对照组为45.7%（χ2 = 6.256，自由度 = 1，P = 0.012，风险比1.470，95%置信区间1.081 - 1.999）。治疗组的Lysholm量表平均得分显著高于对照组（87.48，95%置信区间85.1 - 89.7，标准差 = 9.2）（对照组为81.73，95%置信区间78.4 - 84.9，标准差 = 13.7）（U = 1609，Z = -2.813，P = 0.005）；按性别和年龄进行的亚组分析也显示Lysholm量表评分存在显著差异。
该研究表明，半月板修复术在改善患者治疗效果方面比半月板切除术更有效；取得优秀和良好治疗效果的患者比例更高，且Lysholm量表得分更高。这些研究结果支持将半月板修复术作为半月板损伤患者的首选治疗方法。
