-
Medicine Mar 2021Ankle fusion is the primary treatment for advanced ankle arthritis. With the advancement of arthroscopy technology, ankle arthroscopy fusion has shown many advantages... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Ankle fusion is the primary treatment for advanced ankle arthritis. With the advancement of arthroscopy technology, ankle arthroscopy fusion has shown many advantages over traditional surgery. However, there are few related studies globally, and evidence-based medicine is needed to verify the reliability and feasibility of ankle arthroscopy fusion.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis and open ankle arthrodesis.
METHODS
We searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], Wanfang Database, and VIP Database for published prospective or retrospective controlled studies of arthroscopic-assisted ankle fusion in the treatment of advanced ankle arthritis. The dates were limited from the construction of the library to June 30, 2019. Literature was included based on the principles and methods of evidence-based medicine. Literature retrieval, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by 2 independent reviewers using the Cochrane 5.1 risk bias assessment tool. The methodological bias of the literature was evaluated, and a meta-analysis was using by RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS
A total of 18 studies and 1102 patients were included in the study, including 551 in the arthroscopic surgery group and 551 in the open surgery group. Arthroscopy-assisted surgery for advanced ankle arthritis was more effective than open surgery in terms of fusion rate (odd ratio[OR] = 3.32, 95% confidence interval[CI]:2.16, 5.10), fusion time (mean difference[MD] = -2.31, 95% CI:-4.63, -2.21), intraoperative blood loss (MD = -43.37, 95%CI: -48.49, -38.25), hospital stay (MD = -1.80, 95%CI: -2.28, -1.33), and visual analog scale score (MD = -1.75, 95%CI: -2.04, -1.46). In addition, rate of complications (OR = 0.33, 95%CI: 0.21, 0.52) was superior to open ankle fusion (P < .00001).
CONCLUSION
Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis has more advantages than open ankle arthrodesis in improving the fusion rate and reducing complications, which is worthy of clinical application.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020195727.
Topics: Ankle Joint; Arthrodesis; Arthroscopy; Blood Loss, Surgical; Feasibility Studies; Humans; Length of Stay; Osteoarthritis; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recovery of Function; Reproducibility of Results; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33725876
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024998 -
Pain and Therapy Dec 2021Spinal endoscopic techniques have recently been applied to complex degenerative conditions or failed back surgery syndrome. We performed a systematic review and...
INTRODUCTION
Spinal endoscopic techniques have recently been applied to complex degenerative conditions or failed back surgery syndrome. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess transforaminal endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (TELF) outcomes and adverse event rates. We also analyzed the effectiveness of the technique for chronic pain after arthrodesis or previous spinal surgery.
METHODS
Multiple databases were searched for studies published in the English language, involving patients > 18 years old who underwent endoscopic foraminotomy. Outcomes included the rate of patients who showed "excellent" and "good" postoperative improvement, decreased leg pain, and improved Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Adverse events considered in the analysis included nerve root damage and intraoperative dural tear, the proportion of patients requiring revision surgery or recurrences, and infections.
RESULTS
A total of 14 studies, encompassing 600 patients, were identified. Approximately 85% of patients improved significantly after TELF, without significant differences among different groups (85% vs. 78%, respectively). Mean leg pain decreased an average of 5.2 points, and ODI scores improved by 41.2%. Patients with previous spine surgery or failed back surgery syndrome had higher postoperative leg dysesthesia rates after TELF (14% vs. 1%, respectively).
CONCLUSION
TELF is a useful and safe method to achieve decompression in foraminal stenosis. This technique is indicated in the elderly or patients with comorbidities. Preoperative planning is paramount in determining the foraminal size and endoscope trajectory. A diamond burr is recommended because it has an advantage over the regular endoscopic shaver in bleeding control and complication avoidance.
PubMed: 34490586
DOI: 10.1007/s40122-021-00309-1 -
Journal of ISAKOS : Joint Disorders &... Dec 2023Lisfranc injuries remain a significant, but often misdiagnosed, orthopaedic injury. Alongside the traditional methods of surgical fixation, including arthrodesis and... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
Lisfranc injuries remain a significant, but often misdiagnosed, orthopaedic injury. Alongside the traditional methods of surgical fixation, including arthrodesis and open reduction and internal fixation with screws, suture button fixation is an emerging technique.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of suture button fixation for treatment of Lisfranc injuries through a systematic review.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A comprehensive literature review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for original, English-language studies observing outcomes of Lisfranc injury until August 19, 2022. The clinical studies with evidence level I-IV and at least a 12 month follow-up after the index surgery were included if they examined quantifiable outcomes of Lisfranc injury treated with suture button. Articles were excluded if they included case reports, systematic reviews, comments, editorials, surveys, animal studies, or biomechanical/cadaveric studies. Variables extracted from text and figures include demographic information, return to sport measures, patient reported outcomes, and complications.
FINDINGS
Of the 10 studies included, there were 186 total patients with an age range of 13-72. In every study, all patients were able to return to sport or activity with a return time averaging from 10.8 to 25.9 weeks. Postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores ranged from 83.5 to 97.0 while pain Visual Analogue Scale ranged from 0.6 to 2.5. Complications were reported in four studies at a rate of 7.7% including two cases of diastasis, two cases of paraesthesia, one case of button irritation, and one of postoperative degenerative joint disease, with no reported revisions.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In our systematic review, suture button fixation shows high levels of patient reported outcomes, return to sport, and stable fixation in isolated Lisfranc injuries. This surgical technique provides a physiologic reduction across the Lisfranc joint and reduces the need for reoperation including removal of hardware. However, further evidence such as large sample size high-quality randomized controlled trials is needed to draw a definitive conclusion regarding the best treatment for Lisfranc injuries.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level IV, Systematic Review of Level III and IV studies.
Topics: Humans; Return to Sport; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Fractures, Bone; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Sutures
PubMed: 37611870
DOI: 10.1016/j.jisako.2023.08.004 -
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) Apr 2024The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the outcomes of knee arthrodesis (KA) after periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee. Differences in... (Review)
Review
The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the outcomes of knee arthrodesis (KA) after periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee. Differences in clinical outcomes and complication rates among the intramedullary nailing (IMN), external fixation (EF), and compression plating (CP) procedures were compared. A total of 23 studies were included. Demographics, microbiological data, types of implants, surgical techniques with complications, reoperations, fusion, and amputation rates were reported. A total of 787 patients were evaluated, of whom 601 (76.4%), 166 (21%), and 19 (2.4%) underwent IMN, EF, and CP, respectively. The most common causative pathogen was (). Fusion occurred in 71.9%, 78.8%, and 92.3% of the patients after IMN, EF, and CP, respectively, and no statistically significant difference was found. Reinfection rates were 14.6%, 15.1%, and 10.5% after IMN, EF, and CP, respectively, and no statistically significant difference was found. Conversion to amputation occurred in 4.3%, 5%, and 15.8% of patients after IMN, EF, and CP, respectively; there was a higher rate after CP than after EF. The IMN technique is the most common option used for managing PJI with KA. No differences in terms of fusion, reinfection, or conversion-to-amputation rates were reported between IMN and EF. CP is rarely used, and the high amputation rate represents an important limitation of this technique.
PubMed: 38610226
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12070804 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Sep 2023The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the short-term clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Short-term clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the short-term clinical efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases by meta-analysis.
METHODS
A computer-based search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP) was conducted from the inception of the each database to April 2023. The searched literature was then screened according to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The critical data were extracted and analyzed using Review Manager software5.4.1. Pooled effects were calculated on the basis of data attributes by mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of the studies.
RESULTS
A total of 13 studies and 949 patients met the inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis, 445 in the UBE-LIF group and 504 in the MIS-TLIF group. UBE-TLIF was superior to MIS-TLIF in terms of intraoperative blood flow, postoperative drainage flow, duration of hospital stay, VAS score for low back pain and ODI score, but the operative time was longer than MIS-TLIF group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of total complication rate, modified Macnab grading criteria, fusion rate, VAS score of leg pain, lumbar lordosis, intervertebral disk height.
CONCLUSION
Both UBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF are effective surgical modalities for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine diseases. They have similar treatment outcomes, but UBE-TLIF has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and faster recovery.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This study has been registered at INPLASY.COM (No. INPLASY202320087).
Topics: Animals; Humans; Endoscopy; Lumbar Vertebrae; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37667363
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04138-0 -
Materials (Basel, Switzerland) Oct 2023The first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint is a frequently loaded joint, handling loads up to 90% of bodyweight. First MTP arthrodesis is a frequently performed procedure... (Review)
Review
The first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint is a frequently loaded joint, handling loads up to 90% of bodyweight. First MTP arthrodesis is a frequently performed procedure designed to improve pain in patients with degenerative MTP joint disease. There are a wide variety of fixation constructs for this procedure without consensus on the most effective method. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical integrity of various constructs utilized for first MTP arthrodesis. A systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to 18 June 2023. Articles discussing the biomechanics of first MTP arthrodesis constructs were included. A total of 168 articles were retrieved. A total of 20 articles involving 446 cadaveric and synthetic bone constructs were included in the final review. Of the six articles comparing dorsal plating with compression screws to crossed interfragmentary screws, five found that dorsal plating had significantly higher stiffness. All three studies assessing shape-memory staples found them to be significantly less stable than crossed screws or dorsal plates alone. Both studies evaluating fully threaded screws found them to be stronger than crossed cancellous screws. Wedge resections have been shown to be 10 times stronger than standard planar or conical excision. Dorsal plating with compression screws is the gold standard for MTP arthrodesis. However, more research into newer methods such as fully threaded screws and wedge resections with an increased focus on translation to clinical outcomes is needed.
PubMed: 37834699
DOI: 10.3390/ma16196562 -
Medicine Jul 2016Prevalence estimates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) following cervical spine surgery varied greatly in current studies. We conducted a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
Prevalence estimates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) following cervical spine surgery varied greatly in current studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the point prevalence of ASD after cervical spine surgery.
METHODS
Comprehensive electronic searches of PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library databases were conducted to identify any study published from initial state to January 2016. Those reporting the prevalence of ASD after cervical surgery were included. A random-effects model was used to estimate the prevalence of radiographic ASD, symptomatic ASD, and reoperation ASD. Univariate meta-regression analyses were conducted to explore the potential associations between prevalence and length of follow-up. All analyses were performed using R version 3.2.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing).
RESULTS
A total of 83 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of radiographic ASD, symptomatic ASD, and reoperation ASD after cervical surgery was 28.28% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.96-36.96), 13.34% (95% CI, 11.06-16.00), and 5.78% (95% CI, 4.99-6.69), respectively, in a general analysis. It was found 2.79%, 1.43%, and 0.24% additions per year of follow-up in the incidence of radiographic ASD, symptomatic ASD, and reoperation ASD, respectively.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis provides some details about the prevalence of radiographic ASD, symptomatic ASD, and reoperation ASD after cervical spine surgery. However, the results of this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution because of the heterogeneity among the studies.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Prevalence; Spinal Diseases; Spinal Fusion
PubMed: 27399140
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000004171 -
JBJS Reviews Oct 2022Noninvasive assessment of osseous fusion after spinal fusion surgery is essential for timely diagnosis of patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis and for evaluation of...
BACKGROUND
Noninvasive assessment of osseous fusion after spinal fusion surgery is essential for timely diagnosis of patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis and for evaluation of the performance of spinal fusion procedures. There is, however, no consensus on the definition and assessment of successful posterolateral fusion (PLF) of the lumbar spine. This systematic review aimed to (1) summarize the criteria used for imaging-based fusion assessment after instrumented PLF and (2) evaluate their diagnostic accuracy and reliability.
METHODS
First, a search of the literature was conducted in November 2018 to identify reproducible criteria for imaging-based fusion assessment after primary instrumented PLF between T10 and S1 in adult patients, and to determine their frequency of use. A second search in July 2021 was directed at primary studies on the diagnostic accuracy (with surgical exploration as the reference) and/or reliability (interobserver and intraobserver agreement) of these criteria. Article selection and data extraction were performed by at least 2 reviewers independently. The methodological quality of validation studies was assessed with the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) and QAREL (Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies).
RESULTS
Of the 187 articles included from the first search, 47% used a classification system and 63% used ≥1 descriptive criterion related to osseous bridging (104 articles), absence of motion (78 articles), and/or absence of static signs of nonunion (39 articles). A great variation in terminology, cutoff values, and assessed anatomical locations was observed. While the use of computed tomography (CT) increased over time, radiographs remained predominant. The second search yielded 11 articles with considerable variation in outcomes and quality concerns. Agreement between imaging-based assessment and surgical exploration with regard to demonstration of fusion ranged between 55% and 80%, while reliability ranged from poor to excellent.
CONCLUSIONS
None of the available criteria for noninvasive assessment of fusion status after instrumented PLF were demonstrated to have both sufficient accuracy and reliability. Further elaboration and validation of a well-defined systematic CT-based assessment method that allows grading of the intertransverse and interfacet fusion mass at each side of each fusion level and includes signs of nonunion is recommended.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Reproducibility of Results; Spinal Fusion; Lumbosacral Region; Lumbar Vertebrae; Spinal Diseases
PubMed: 36325766
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.22.00129 -
The Open Orthopaedics Journal 2017The proximal humerus is a common location for both primary and metastatic bone tumors. There are numerous reconstruction options after surgical resection. There is no... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The proximal humerus is a common location for both primary and metastatic bone tumors. There are numerous reconstruction options after surgical resection. There is no consensus on the ideal method of reconstruction.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed with a focus on the surgical reconstructive options for lesions involving the proximal humerus.
RESULTS
A total of 50 articles and 1227 patients were included for analysis. Reoperation rates were autograft arthrodesis (11%), megaprosthesis (10%), RSA (17%), hemiarthroplasty (26%), and osteoarticular allograft (34%). Mechanical failure rates, including prosthetic loosening, fracture, and dislocation, were highest in allograft-containing constructs (APC, osteoarticular allograft, arthrodesis) followed by arthroplasty (hemiarthroplasty, RSA, megaprosthesis) and lowest for autografts (vascularized fibula, autograft arthrodesis). Infections involving RSA (9%) were higher than hemiarthroplasty (0%) and megaprosthesis (4%). Postoperative function as measured by MSTS score were similar amongst all prosthetic options, ranging from 66% to 74%, and claviculo pro humeri (CPH) was slightly better (83%). Patients were generally limited to active abduction of approximately 45° and no greater than 90°. With resection of the rotator cuff, deltoid muscle or axillary nerve, function and stability were compromised even further. If the rotator cuff was sacrificed but the deltoid and axillary nerve preserved, active forward flexion and abduction were superior with RSA.
DISCUSSION
Various reconstruction techniques for the proximal humerus lead to relatively similar functional results. Surgical choice should be tailored to anatomic defect and functional requirements.
PubMed: 28458733
DOI: 10.2174/1874325001711010203 -
Orthopaedic Surgery Apr 2020While osteoarthritis is a common degenerative disease, ankle osteoarthritis is a subdivision that has received little attention. Two effective ways to treat... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Comparison of the Efficiency and Safety of Total Ankle Replacement and Ankle Arthrodesis in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
While osteoarthritis is a common degenerative disease, ankle osteoarthritis is a subdivision that has received little attention. Two effective ways to treat osteoarthritis of the ankle are total ankle replacement (TAR) and ankle arthrodesis (AAD). Whether TAR or AAD is more beneficial for treatment is controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficiency (clinical outcome and patient satisfaction) and safety (complications and survival) of these two procedures. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was performed as a guideline for this study. Three electronic databases, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, were searched up to May 2019, with no language restrictions. Prospective or retrospective comparative studies were identified. The outcomes included clinical outcome, patient satisfaction, complications, and survival. Review Manager (Revman) 5.3 software was used to conduct the data analysis. We only selected literature from the past 5 years (no earlier than 2015). Seven comparative studies were included. There were six cohort studies and one cross-sectional study. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of cohort studies, and The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) checklist was chosen to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies. No significant difference was observed for efficiency and safety. Clinical outcome was included in five studies with four different scoring systems. Two of them used the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) questionnaire scores to assess the two procedures (mean difference, -4.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], -11.37-2.85; P = 0.24; I = 1%). Patient satisfaction (risk ratio [RR], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.65-1.40; P = 0.82; I = 54%), complications (RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.16-8.21; P = 0.89; I = 84%), and survival (RR, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.33-11.08; P = 0.47; I = 90%) showed no significant difference between the TAR group and the AAD group. This meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between TAR and AAD in clinical outcome, patient satisfaction, complications, and survival. This revealed that TAR and AAD could appear to have similar results in these aspects. Therefore, the present results are not sufficient to conclude which of these two methods is better. Further studies are needed to obtain more clues.
Topics: Ankle Joint; Arthrodesis; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Ankle; Humans; Osteoarthritis; Patient Satisfaction; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32227465
DOI: 10.1111/os.12635