-
Sports Health 2022Only 55% of the athletes return to competitive sports after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Athletes younger than 25 years who return to sports have a second...
CONTEXT
Only 55% of the athletes return to competitive sports after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Athletes younger than 25 years who return to sports have a second injury rate of 23%. There may be a mismatch between rehabilitation contents and the demands an athlete faces after returning to sports. Current return-to-sports (RTS) tests utilize closed and predictable motor skills; however, demands on the field are different. Neurocognitive functions are essential to manage dynamic sport situations and may fluctuate after peripheral injuries. Most RTS and rehabilitation paradigms appear to lack this aspect, which might be linked to increased risk of second injury.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic and scoping review aims to map existing evidence about neurocognitive and neurophysiological functions in athletes, which could be linked to ACL injury in an integrated fashion and bring an extensive perspective to assessment and rehabilitation approaches.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched to identify relevant studies published between 2005 and 2020 using the keywords , , , , , , , and .
STUDY SELECTION
Studies investigating either neurocognitive or neurophysiological functions in athletes and linking these to ACL injury regardless of their design and technique were included.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level 3.
DATA EXTRACTION
The demographic, temporal, neurological, and behavioral data revealing possible injury-related aspects were extracted and summarized.
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies were included in this review. Deficits in different neurocognitive domains and changes in neurophysiological functions could be a predisposing risk factor for, or a consequence caused by, ACL injuries.
CONCLUSION
Clinicians should view ACL injuries not only as a musculoskeletal but also as a neural lesion with neurocognitive and neurophysiological aspects. Rehabilitation and RTS paradigms should consider these changes for assessment and interventions after injury.
Topics: Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Athletes; Humans; Reinjuries; Return to Sport
PubMed: 34236003
DOI: 10.1177/19417381211029265 -
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma... Feb 2012There is considerable controversy as to which technique is best option for reconstruction after multilevel anterior decompression for cervical spondylosis. The aim of... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
There is considerable controversy as to which technique is best option for reconstruction after multilevel anterior decompression for cervical spondylosis. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic results and complications of anterior cervical discectomy fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy fusion (ACCF) in the treatment of multi-level cervical spondylosis.
METHOD
We reviewed and analyzed papers published from Jan 1969 to Dec 2010 regarding the comparison of ACDF and ACCF for multilevel cervical spondylosis. Statistical comparisons were made when appropriate.
RESULTS
Twelve studies were included in this systematic review. Blood loss was greater for ACCF compared with ACDF. Similarly, the rate of graft dislodgement in ACCF was higher than that in ACDF. Nonunion rates were 18.4% for 2-level ACDF and 37.3% for 3-level ACDF, whereas nonfusion rates were 5.1% for single-level ACCF and 15.2% for 2-level ACCF. In addition, nonunion rates for three disc levels fused were much higher than that for two disc levels fused, regardless of discectomy or corpectomy. Clinical outcome was compared between ACDF and ACCF in nine studies. Of these, similar outcome was found between ACDF and ACCF in six studies, whereas three studies reported better outcome in ACCF compared with ACDF.
CONCLUSION
Nonunion rates of ACDF are higher than those of ACCF for multilevel cervical spondylosis. Sometimes, clinical outcome of ACCF was better than ACDF for multilevel cervical spondylosis.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Spinal Fusion; Spondylosis
PubMed: 21968573
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-011-1402-6 -
JSES Reviews, Reports, and Techniques Nov 2023Anterior shoulder instability is a common problem around the world, with a high risk for recurrence following the index dislocation. Surgical stabilization is commonly... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Anterior shoulder instability is a common problem around the world, with a high risk for recurrence following the index dislocation. Surgical stabilization is commonly indicated for persistent instability, particularly in patients at high risk for recurrence, to minimize the risk of further labral injury and glenoid bone loss. However, there is little known about global geographic differences in the surgical management of anterior shoulder instability. As such, the purpose of this study was to evaluate and systematically review regional differences in the surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability, particularly the indications for and outcomes from bony stabilization procedures compared to soft tissue procedures.
METHODS
A systematic review, in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, was performed. Inclusion criteria consisted of level I and II evidence studies evaluating indications, techniques, and outcomes following operative management of anterior shoulder instability published from January 2000 to September 2021. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were grouped into four global regions (Asia, Europe, North America, South America) based on primary study location. Patient demographics, procedural details, patient reported outcomes, and complications (recurrence and reoperation rates) were compared between regions.
RESULTS
Sixty (n = 60) studies (5480 patients) were identified. Eighty-six percent of all patients were male, with a mean age of 26.7 years. There was no difference in mean patient age, though patients undergoing bony stabilization procedures were older than those undergoing soft-tissue stabilization procedures ( = .0002) in all regions. The proportion of bony versus soft-tissue procedure groups did not differ significantly among regions. The indications for bony stabilization procedures varied significantly. Mean final follow-up was 3.5 years. Recurrent instability was 5.0% and did not vary across regions. However, recurrent instability occurred more frequently following soft-tissue compared to bony stabilization procedures ( = .017). South American studies utilized fewer anchors during soft tissue stabilization ( < .0001) and reported a higher reoperation rate compared to other regions ( = .009).
CONCLUSION
There is global variation in the reporting of outcomes following surgery for anterior shoulder instability. The proportion of bony and soft-tissue procedures is similar, irrespective of geographic region. Recurrent instability does not vary by region but occurs more frequently following soft-tissue compared to bony stabilization procedures. There are a number of potential medical and nonmedical factors that may affect global variation in the surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability.
PubMed: 37928980
DOI: 10.1016/j.xrrt.2023.08.005 -
Cardiovascular Revascularization... Dec 2017To determine the role of warfarin (WF) prophylaxis in the prevention of left ventricular thrombus (LVT) formation and subsequent embolic complications following an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To determine the role of warfarin (WF) prophylaxis in the prevention of left ventricular thrombus (LVT) formation and subsequent embolic complications following an anterior ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and wall motion abnormalities.
BACKGROUND
The role of oral anticoagulation prophylaxis, in addition to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), in the current era of percutaneous coronary intervention has not been well studied, despite being a class IIb recommendation in the AHA/ACC STEMI guidelines.
METHODS
The Cochrane search strategy was used to search PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library for relevant results. Four studies, two retrospective, one prospective registry, and a randomized feasibility control trial met criteria for inclusion. Data was pooled using a random effects model and reported as odds ratios (OR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Primary outcomes of interest were rate of stroke, major bleeding and mortality.
RESULTS
Pooled analysis included 526 patients in the No WF group and 347 patients in the WF group. No statistical difference in rate of stroke (OR: 2.72 [95% CI: 0.47-15.88; p=0.21]) or mortality (OR: 1.50 [95% CI 0.29-7.71; p=0.63]) was observed. Major bleeding was significantly higher in the WF group (OR: 2.56 [95% CI: 1.34-4.89; p=0.004]).
CONCLUSIONS
The routine use of DAPT and WF for prophylaxis against LVT formation following an anterior STEMI with associated decrease in LVEF and wall motion abnormalities, appears to result in no mortality benefit or reduction in stroke rates, but may increase the frequency of major bleeding.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anterior Wall Myocardial Infarction; Anticoagulants; Chi-Square Distribution; Embolism; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Contraction; Odds Ratio; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Risk Factors; ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction; Stroke; Stroke Volume; Thrombosis; Treatment Outcome; Ventricular Function, Left; Warfarin; Young Adult
PubMed: 28501493
DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2017.05.002 -
The Knee Oct 2023To critically evaluate the efficacy and safety of early versus delayed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To critically evaluate the efficacy and safety of early versus delayed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries based on the different cut-off values of the timing of operation.
METHODS
PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature, and Wanfang Digital Periodical database were searched from inception to November 2022 without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies (CSs) comparing early ACLR with delayed ACLR for ACL injuries were included.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies (10 RCTs and 14 CSs) were included. According to the information from included studies, 3 weeks, 4 weeks, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months after ACL injuries were considered as the cut-off values of early and delayed ACLR. When 4 weeks were considered as the cut-off value, early ACLR could significantly improve Lysholm score, IKDC score and VAS score at 6 and 12 months postoperatively and decrease the incidence of adverse events compared with delayed ACLR (P < 0.05). However, no statistically significant difference in positive rate of Lachman test and incidence of meniscus injuries and chondral lesions between the two groups when 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 6 months or 12 months after ACL injuries were considered as the cut-off values of early and delayed ACLR (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The present study suggests that early ACLR, especially conducted within 3-4 weeks after ACL injuries, may be more effective for improving knee function and relieving pain compared with delayed ACLR. More high-quality RCTs are warranted.
Topics: Humans; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Knee Joint; Meniscus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37517167
DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2023.07.008 -
Arthroscopy : the Journal of... Jun 2023To evaluate the clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) through a systematic review of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) through a systematic review of current available evidence.
METHODS
A systematic database search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL was performed from inception up to December 7, 2021, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses. Follow-up studies (inception cohort studies/nonrandomized controlled trials/retrospective cohort studies) and case series that had more than 10 people published in English and involved patients who underwent a combination of ACLR and MAT were included. The quality of these studies was appraised using the Cochrane Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Systematic review of International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm, and Tegner activity scores were conducted.
RESULTS
Seven studies involving 363 patients were included. The average mean follow-up time was 4.08 years, ranging from 1.75 to 14 years. All studies used the Lysholm Knee Scoring system to report clinical outcomes, whereas 2 studies and 4 studies used the IKDC Questionnaire and Tegner activity scale respectively to measure clinical outcomes postoperatively. Comparing postoperative with preoperative scores, we found an improvement above the minimal clinically important difference for the Lysholm (mean difference [MD] range 16.00-26.10) and Tegner activity scores (MD range 1.50-1.90). All but one study reported an increase above the minimal clinically important difference for IKDC scores postoperatively (MD range 5.60-23.00).
CONCLUSIONS
Combined MAT and ACLR have good 2- to 14-year clinical outcomes postoperatively and is an optimal procedure for patients with concurrent ACL injuries with irreparable meniscus injuries.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
IV, systematic review and/or meta-analysis of studies with Levels I to IV.
Topics: Humans; Anterior Cruciate Ligament; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Knee Joint; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Meniscus; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Allografts
PubMed: 36343764
DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2022.10.042 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Nov 2018Anterior shoulder instability is the most common sequela of shoulder dislocation and can result in repeated dislocations or subluxation of the glenohumeral joint.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Anterior shoulder instability is the most common sequela of shoulder dislocation and can result in repeated dislocations or subluxation of the glenohumeral joint. Anterior shoulder instability can be treated conservatively or surgically with several procedures.
PURPOSE
To date, arthroscopic Bankart is the most common surgical procedure for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. No previous studies have compared all anterior shoulder surgical procedures. In this study, the authors performed a systematic review of journal articles describing all surgical procedures for anterior shoulder instability to determine the scientific evidence and level of recommendation.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHOD
A comprehensive literature search was conducted (July 19, 2016) with 4 reputed databases: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane databases, and Web of Science. The articles found in the literature search were screened by 2 reviewers on the basis of their titles, abstracts, and full text. Data were extracted from relevant studies, and potentially relevant records were selected for full-text review. Included articles were classified according to their scientific quality (level of evidence, 1-5). The studies were then combined for each surgical procedure, and a grade of recommendation was assigned for each procedure: grade A, treatment recommendation based on level 1 evidence studies; B, based on level 2 or 3 evidence studies; C, based on level 4 or 5 evidence and could represent conflicting results; or I, insufficient evidence to recommend a treatment. As such, the grade of recommendation provides a summary score for the quality and quantity of available literature to support the surgical procedures reviewed here.
RESULTS
The systematic literature review generated 11,281 articles. After screening, 655 articles were included. Results revealed 31 surgical procedures for shoulder instability following dislocation: 10 surgical procedures were given an A or B recommendation; 11, a C recommendation; and 10, an I recommendation.
CONCLUSION
This review identified many surgical procedures to treat anterior shoulder instability. Ten of these surgical procedures had an abundant amount of published articles to describe their safety and efficacy. Arthroscopic Bankart and open Bankart were the most commonly reported procedures that cite satisfactory postoperative outcomes and limited complications. Publications on the other surgical procedures were less common. Surgeons should be careful when recommending surgery, and they should choose the appropriate surgical procedure based on evidence-based literature.
PubMed: 30480013
DOI: 10.1177/2325967118805983 -
JSES International Jan 2022Anterior shoulder instability frequently occurs in young, physically active individuals and may be treated with surgical stabilization. Previous studies have shown that... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Anterior shoulder instability frequently occurs in young, physically active individuals and may be treated with surgical stabilization. Previous studies have shown that males more often require surgical management for anterior shoulder instability and may have a higher frequency of recurrent instability episodes after surgical management, but females have been found to have increased incidence of apprehension after surgical stabilization. The purpose of this study is to review the literature and assess anterior shoulder surgical stabilization postoperative outcomes between males and females to identify and describe sex-based differences.
METHODS
A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify level I-IV clinical studies on anterior shoulder instability published between 1960 and August 2020. We included studies that evaluated sex-specific outcomes in patients who underwent anterior shoulder instability procedures. A meta-analysis of the data was performed to analyze sex-specific outcomes.
RESULTS
Thirty studies (2.1%) met inclusion criteria, representing 9829 patients. Of the studies that reported the number of male and female patients, 74% were male and 26% were female. Twenty-six studies used Bankart repair alone, two used open Latarjet procedure alone, and two had a Bankart repair group and Latarjet procedure group. Instability recurrence, return to sport, and apprehension were included in the meta-analysis. Our meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly higher rate of instability recurrence for males than for females who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair (risk ratio [RR] = 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03, 1.52; = .0239). We did not identify a significant difference between males and females in rates of apprehension (RR = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.37, 1.27; = .2300) or return to sport (RR = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.81, 1.18; I = 0%; = .8110) for arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedure.
CONCLUSION
For patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder stabilization, recurrent rates of instability were significantly higher for males than for females. When open Bankart and Latarjet procedures were included, there was no difference. No difference was seen between males and females after arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedures with regard to return to sport or apprehension.
PubMed: 35141686
DOI: 10.1016/j.jseint.2021.10.002 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Jan 2022The clinical outcomes of using a zero-profile for anterior cervical decompression and fusion were evaluated by comparison with anterior cervical plates. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of outcomes between Zero-p implant and anterior cervical plate interbody fusion systems for anterior cervical decompression and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
PURPOSE
The clinical outcomes of using a zero-profile for anterior cervical decompression and fusion were evaluated by comparison with anterior cervical plates.
METHODS
All of the comparative studies published in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, Web of Science, EBSOChost, and EMBASE databases as of 1 October 2021 were included. All outcomes were analysed using Review Manager 5.4.
RESULTS
Seven randomized controlled studies were included with a total of 528 patients, and all studies were randomized controlled studies. The meta-analysis outcomes indicated that the use of zero-profile fixation for anterior cervical decompression and fusion was better than anterior cervical plate fixation regarding the incidence of postoperative dysphagia (P < 0.05), adjacent-level ossification (P < 0.05), and operational time (P < 0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, Visual Analogue Scale, Neck Disability Index, or Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale (all P > 0.05) between the zero-profile and anterior cervical plate groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The systematic review and meta-analysis indicated that zero-profile and anterior cervical plates could result in good postoperative outcomes in anterior cervical decompression and fusion. No significant differences were found in intraoperative blood loss, Visual Analogue Scale, Neck Disability Index, or Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale. However, the zero-profile is superior to the anterior cervical plate in the following measures: incidence of postoperative dysphagia, adjacent-level ossification, and operational time. PROSPERO registration CRD42021278214.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Bone Plates; Cervical Vertebrae; Decompression; Deglutition Disorders; Diskectomy; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35078496
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-02940-w -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jun 2019The association between tooth type, location in the dental arch, and selection of a post-and-core system for endodontically treated teeth is unclear. Information on the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
The association between tooth type, location in the dental arch, and selection of a post-and-core system for endodontically treated teeth is unclear. Information on the influence of these parameters on the failure rate of teeth treated with post-and-core restorations is needed.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the available evidence on the failure rates of anterior and posterior teeth treated with post-and-core restorations.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, Brazilian Library in Dentistry, Cochrane Library, and Gray literature for randomized clinical trials comparing the failure rates of anterior and posterior teeth treated with post-and-core restorations. The risk of bias tool from the Cochrane Collaboration was used for quality assessment of the studies.
RESULTS
The search strategy identified 2526 articles, and 6 studies were included in the meta-analysis. No difference in the failure rate of post-and-core restorations placed in anterior and posterior teeth was found in most studies. The risk ratio for anterior versus posterior teeth was 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-1.64; P=.79). The risk ratio for incisors versus canines was 3.08 (95% CI, 0.56-17.04; P=.20) and that for premolars versus molars was 0.45 (95% CI, 0.12-1.74; P=.25). The risk ratio for prefabricated glass fiber posts on anterior versus posterior teeth was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.61-2.09; P=.70) and that for metal posts was 1.10 (95% CI, 0.64-1.91; P=.72).
CONCLUSIONS
The failure rates in anterior and posterior teeth treated with post-and-core restorations were similar at short- to medium-term follow-up. More well-designed clinical trials comparing the survival and failure rates of anterior and posterior teeth treated with post-and-core restorations with longer follow-up times are needed.
Topics: Brazil; Composite Resins; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans; Incisor; Molar; Post and Core Technique; Tooth, Nonvital
PubMed: 30617032
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.08.004