前交叉韧带重建术
纤维接头
前交叉韧带
医学
体质指数
外科
科克伦图书馆
内科学
随机对照试验
作者
Jaydeep Dhillon,Grace Tanguilig,Carson Keeter,Kyle A. Borque,Wendell Heard,Matthew J. Kraeutler
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.arthro.2024.01.026
摘要
Purpose
To perform a systematic review of clinical studies to directly compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with versus without suture tape (ST) augmentation. Methods
A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify comparative studies directly comparing outcomes of ACLR with versus without ST augmentation with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. The search terms used were anterior cruciate ligament suture tape. Patients were evaluated based on graft failure rates, return to sport (RTS), anteroposterior (AP) laxity, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Results
Five studies (all Level III) met inclusion criteria, including a total of 246 patients undergoing ACLR with ST augmentation (SA group) and 282 patients undergoing ACLR without augmentation (control group). Patient age ranged from 14.9 to 29.7 years. The mean follow-up time ranged from 24.0 to 48.6 months. The mean body mass index ranged from 25.3 to 26.3 kg/m2 and the overall percentage of males ranged from 43.4% to 69.0%. Overall, the graft failure rate ranged from 1.0% to 25.0% in the SA group and 8.0% to 20.0% in the control group. Among the studies that reported RTS rates, the rate ranged from 69.2% to 88.9% in the SA group and 51.5% to 87.5% in the control group. Among all PROs, 2 studies found a significant difference in the Tegner score favoring the SA group. Otherwise, no significant differences were found between groups in terms of PROs. No significant differences in AP laxity were found between groups within any particular study. There was heterogeneity between studies regarding surgical techniques, postoperative rehabilitation protocols, and reported PROs. Conclusions
There is insufficient evidence to suggest that patients undergoing ACLR with ST augmentation may experience favorable clinical outcomes compared with ACLR alone. Level of Evidence
Level III, systematic review of Level III studies.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI