The journal of hand surgery Asian-Pacific volume · 2017
Volar Tenodesis for the Treatment of Swan-neck Deformity; A Systematic Review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kiziridis Georgios, Giddins Grey E B
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Swan-neck deformity is a common problem particularly in patients with Rheumatoid arthritis. Mobile swan-neck deformities (Nalebuff types I,II) can be treated non-operatively and operatively. In this paper we report on a systematic review of the treatment of swan-neck deformities with volar tenodesis.
METHODS: We performed a literature search and analysed the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only eight papers were eligible. None was of high quality. The data reporting was very variable. Therefore, no meta-analysis could be performed, but only a descriptive analysis.
RESULTS: The techniques work in preventing proximal inter-phalangeal joint hyperextension between 60 and 100% in these studies. There appears to be some recurrence of hyper-extension with time so that papers with longer follow-up tend to have poorer results.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no good evidence that one technique is superior to another. The choice of technique is likely to remain based on surgeon preference for the foreseeable future. Future studies should be at least comparative and preferably part of a trial.
METHODS: We performed a literature search and analysed the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only eight papers were eligible. None was of high quality. The data reporting was very variable. Therefore, no meta-analysis could be performed, but only a descriptive analysis.
RESULTS: The techniques work in preventing proximal inter-phalangeal joint hyperextension between 60 and 100% in these studies. There appears to be some recurrence of hyper-extension with time so that papers with longer follow-up tend to have poorer results.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no good evidence that one technique is superior to another. The choice of technique is likely to remain based on surgeon preference for the foreseeable future. Future studies should be at least comparative and preferably part of a trial.