Suppr超能文献

一项比较急性前交叉韧带损伤的即刻手术修复与择期延迟手术修复的随机对照试验的可行性——IODA试点试验结果

The feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial that compares immediate versus optional delayed surgical repair for treatment of acute Anterior cruciate ligament injury-results of the IODA pilot trial.

作者信息

Ghafelzadeh Ahwaz Feryal, Smeets Annemie, Bogaerts Stijn, Berger Pieter, Peers Koen

机构信息

Research Group of Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine, Department of Development & Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Department of Rehabilitation Sciences & Physiotherapy, Research Group of Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

出版信息

Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2025 May 8;11(1):63. doi: 10.1186/s40814-025-01652-2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Standard care for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries often includes surgical reconstruction of the ACL. However, two randomized controlled trials (RCT) concluded that conservative treatment does not result in inferior clinical outcomes compared to immediate ACL reconstruction. More research is needed to verify these results and to assess whether patient-specific parameters can predict whether a patient would benefit from immediate surgery or conservative treatment. However, before running such an RCT, we performed this pilot study to assess the feasibility of recruiting patients for such an RCT.

METHODS

This is a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, controlled pilot trial with two parallel groups funded by the Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE trials). Patients with an acute ACL injury were recruited from two Belgian hospitals. They were randomized to either conservative treatment (e.g., rehabilitation with optional delayed surgery in case of persistent instability) or immediate surgery (< 12 weeks post-injury). The primary aim of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility of participant recruitment. Furthermore, we evaluated adherence to the protocol and the allocated treatment arm and the feasibility of recruiting a representative sample of ACL patients.

RESULTS

Out of the initial 70 screened patients, 29 were included in the pilot study, 15 were randomized in the conservative treatment group, and 14 were in the surgical treatment group. This yielded a recruitment rate of 41%. However, the investigators could not screen many potential patients due to inadequate referrals within the recruiting hospitals. Seven cross-overs were observed between the treatment arms: 3 patients who were assigned to the conservative treatment group insisted on immediate surgery, while four patients allocated to immediate surgery chose not to undergo surgery. Of the initial 29 patients, 5 dropped out after randomization. The recruited sample confirmed the typically young and physically active sample of ACL patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study confirmed the challenging recruitment process for an RCT that compares a surgical and a non-surgical treatment option. While encountering substantial recruitment challenges, our pilot study revealed that transitioning to a full-scale RCT is feasible, with some essential modifications. Key adjustments encompassed augmenting the number of participating sites, optimizing patient recruitment processes, and extending the recruitment period. Furthermore, this study showed a high completion rate, affirming the feasibility of the study protocol. However, there was a high cross-over rate (7/29 patients) between treatment arms. This should be avoided when progressing to the full trial. The recruited sample reflects a young and active population, which represents the ACL population well.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04408690) on 25/05/2020.

摘要

背景

前交叉韧带(ACL)损伤的标准治疗通常包括ACL的手术重建。然而,两项随机对照试验(RCT)得出结论,与立即进行ACL重建相比,保守治疗的临床结果并不差。需要更多研究来验证这些结果,并评估患者特异性参数是否可以预测患者是否会从立即手术或保守治疗中获益。然而,在进行此类RCT之前,我们开展了这项试点研究,以评估招募患者进行此类RCT的可行性。

方法

这是一项实用的、多中心的、随机对照试点试验,有两个平行组,由比利时医疗保健知识中心(KCE试验)资助。急性ACL损伤患者从两家比利时医院招募。他们被随机分为保守治疗组(例如,康复治疗,若持续不稳定可选择延迟手术)或立即手术组(受伤后<12周)。这项试点研究的主要目的是评估参与者招募的可行性。此外,我们评估了对方案和分配治疗组的依从性,以及招募ACL患者代表性样本的可行性。

结果

在最初筛查的70名患者中,29名被纳入试点研究,15名被随机分配到保守治疗组,14名被分配到手术治疗组。招募率为41%。然而,由于招募医院内转诊不足,研究人员无法筛查许多潜在患者。在治疗组之间观察到7例交叉情况:3名被分配到保守治疗组的患者坚持立即手术,而4名被分配到立即手术组的患者选择不进行手术。在最初的29名患者中,5名在随机分组后退出。招募的样本证实了ACL患者通常是年轻且身体活跃的样本。

结论

这项试点研究证实了比较手术和非手术治疗方案的RCT在招募过程中具有挑战性。虽然遇到了重大的招募挑战,但我们的试点研究表明,进行全面RCT是可行的,但需要一些必要的修改。关键调整包括增加参与地点的数量、优化患者招募流程以及延长招募期。此外,这项研究显示了较高的完成率,证实了研究方案的可行性。然而,治疗组之间的交叉率较高(29名患者中有7名)。在进行全面试验时应避免这种情况。招募的样本反映了年轻且活跃的人群,很好地代表了ACL患者群体。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04408690),2020年5月25日。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ffe4/12060306/7383072c0a65/40814_2025_1652_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