Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2023
Similar Outcomes Are Found Between Quadriceps Tendon Repair With Transosseous Tunnels and Suture Anchors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Coladonato Carlo, Perez Andres R, Sonnier John Hayden, Looney Austin M, Delvadia Bela P, Okhuereigbe David O, Walia Pankhuri, Tjoumakaris Fotios P, Freedman Kevin B
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes and biomechanical performance of transosseous tunnels compared with suture anchors for quadriceps tendon repair.
METHODS: In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was performed in April 2021 in the following databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed (1980-2021), MEDLINE (1980-2021), Embase (1980-2021), and CINAHL (1980-2021). Level I-IV studies were included if they provided outcome data for surgical repair of the quadriceps tendon using transosseous tunnels or suture anchors with minimum 1-year follow-up. Biomechanical studies comparing transosseous tunnels and suture anchors were separately analyzed.
RESULTS: The systematic search yielded 1,837 citations, 23 of which met inclusion criteria (18 clinical, 5 biomechanical). In total, 13 studies reported results for transosseous repair and 7 studies reported results for repair with suture anchors. There were results for 508 patients from clinical studies. The average postoperative Lysholm score ranged from 88 to 92 for suture anchor repairs and 72.8 to 94 for transosseous repairs with range of motion ranging from 117° to 138° and 116° to 135°, respectively. Synthesis of the biomechanical data revealed the mean difference in load to failure was not significant between constructs (137.21; 95% confidence interval -10.14 to 284.57 N; P = .068).
CONCLUSIONS: Transosseous and suture anchor techniques for quadriceps tendon repair result in similar biomechanical and postoperative outcomes. No difference between techniques in regard to ultimate load to failure among comparative biomechanical studies were observed.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review level III-IV studies.
METHODS: In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was performed in April 2021 in the following databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed (1980-2021), MEDLINE (1980-2021), Embase (1980-2021), and CINAHL (1980-2021). Level I-IV studies were included if they provided outcome data for surgical repair of the quadriceps tendon using transosseous tunnels or suture anchors with minimum 1-year follow-up. Biomechanical studies comparing transosseous tunnels and suture anchors were separately analyzed.
RESULTS: The systematic search yielded 1,837 citations, 23 of which met inclusion criteria (18 clinical, 5 biomechanical). In total, 13 studies reported results for transosseous repair and 7 studies reported results for repair with suture anchors. There were results for 508 patients from clinical studies. The average postoperative Lysholm score ranged from 88 to 92 for suture anchor repairs and 72.8 to 94 for transosseous repairs with range of motion ranging from 117° to 138° and 116° to 135°, respectively. Synthesis of the biomechanical data revealed the mean difference in load to failure was not significant between constructs (137.21; 95% confidence interval -10.14 to 284.57 N; P = .068).
CONCLUSIONS: Transosseous and suture anchor techniques for quadriceps tendon repair result in similar biomechanical and postoperative outcomes. No difference between techniques in regard to ultimate load to failure among comparative biomechanical studies were observed.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review level III-IV studies.