-
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related... Dec 2020Machine learning (ML) is a subdomain of artificial intelligence that enables computers to abstract patterns from data without explicit programming. A myriad of impactful...
BACKGROUND
Machine learning (ML) is a subdomain of artificial intelligence that enables computers to abstract patterns from data without explicit programming. A myriad of impactful ML applications already exists in orthopaedics ranging from predicting infections after surgery to diagnostic imaging. However, no systematic reviews that we know of have compared, in particular, the performance of ML models with that of clinicians in musculoskeletal imaging to provide an up-to-date summary regarding the extent of applying ML to imaging diagnoses. By doing so, this review delves into where current ML developments stand in aiding orthopaedists in assessing musculoskeletal images.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
This systematic review aimed (1) to compare performance of ML models versus clinicians in detecting, differentiating, or classifying orthopaedic abnormalities on imaging by (A) accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, (B) input features (for example, plain radiographs, MRI scans, ultrasound), (C) clinician specialties, and (2) to compare the performance of clinician-aided versus unaided ML models.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to October 1, 2019, using synonyms for machine learning and all potential orthopaedic specialties. We included all studies that compared ML models head-to-head against clinicians in the binary detection of abnormalities in musculoskeletal images. After screening 6531 studies, we ultimately included 12 studies. We conducted quality assessment using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) checklist. All 12 studies were of comparable quality, and they all clearly included six of the eight critical appraisal items (study aim, input feature, ground truth, ML versus human comparison, performance metric, and ML model description). This justified summarizing the findings in a quantitative form by calculating the median absolute improvement of the ML models compared with clinicians for the following metrics of performance: accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.
RESULTS
ML models provided, in aggregate, only very slight improvements in diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity compared with clinicians working alone and were on par in specificity (3% (interquartile range [IQR] -2.0% to 7.5%), 0.06% (IQR -0.03 to 0.14), and 0.00 (IQR -0.048 to 0.048), respectively). Inputs used by the ML models were plain radiographs (n = 8), MRI scans (n = 3), and ultrasound examinations (n = 1). Overall, ML models outperformed clinicians more when interpreting plain radiographs than when interpreting MRIs (17 of 34 and 3 of 16 performance comparisons, respectively). Orthopaedists and radiologists performed similarly to ML models, while ML models mostly outperformed other clinicians (outperformance in 7 of 19, 7 of 23, and 6 of 10 performance comparisons, respectively). Two studies evaluated the performance of clinicians aided and unaided by ML models; both demonstrated considerable improvements in ML-aided clinician performance by reporting a 47% decrease of misinterpretation rate (95% confidence interval [CI] 37 to 54; p < 0.001) and a mean increase in specificity of 0.048 (95% CI 0.029 to 0.068; p < 0.001) in detecting abnormalities on musculoskeletal images.
CONCLUSIONS
At present, ML models have comparable performance to clinicians in assessing musculoskeletal images. ML models may enhance the performance of clinicians as a technical supplement rather than as a replacement for clinical intelligence. Future ML-related studies should emphasize how ML models can complement clinicians, instead of determining the overall superiority of one versus the other. This can be accomplished by improving transparent reporting, diminishing bias, determining the feasibility of implantation in the clinical setting, and appropriately tempering conclusions.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level III, diagnostic study.
Topics: Clinical Competence; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Machine Learning; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Musculoskeletal System; Orthopedic Surgeons; Pattern Recognition, Automated; Predictive Value of Tests; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; Reproducibility of Results; Ultrasonography; Visual Perception
PubMed: 32740477
DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001360 -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Jan 2021This systematic review collated evidence on the burden of XLH in adults. Data captured highlight the substantial ongoing burden of XLH in adulthood and identified unmet...
UNLABELLED
This systematic review collated evidence on the burden of XLH in adults. Data captured highlight the substantial ongoing burden of XLH in adulthood and identified unmet needs. Greater awareness and understanding of the impact of XLH in adulthood are needed to improve care and outcomes in adults with XLH.
INTRODUCTION
X-linked hypophosphataemia (XLH) is a rare metabolic bone disease characterized by renal phosphate wasting and musculoskeletal manifestations. Whilst the disease's impact in children is well documented, information on the effects of this progressive, debilitating condition on adults is lacking. This systematic review aimed to collate existing evidence on the burden of XLH in adulthood to identify unmet needs.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases and recent congress reports were searched on 19 February 2019 for English-language publications describing the medical, humanistic and socio-economic impact of XLH in adults (≥ 18 years old). In addition, a structured Internet search was conducted.
RESULTS
Of the 2351 articles identified, 91 met the selection criteria along with 44 congress abstracts. Data show that adults with XLH experience a range of clinical manifestations, particularly skeletal deformities and (pseudo)fractures, along with pain, dental abnormalities and impaired physical function and mobility. XLH in adulthood impacts on quality of life and places limitations on daily activities. The level of healthcare resource utilization among adults with XLH is indicative of substantial socio-economic burden; further research is needed to quantitate the economic impact on the healthcare system, society and patients. Adults with XLH may not receive appropriate care and treatment; a possible explanation for this is a lack of awareness among healthcare professionals.
CONCLUSION
XLH in adults is associated with considerable disease burden and unmet needs. Forthcoming studies and increased awareness of the impact of XLH in adulthood should help to improve management of XLH in adulthood and patient outcomes.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Case-Control Studies; Child; Cohort Studies; Cost of Illness; Double-Blind Method; Familial Hypophosphatemic Rickets; Female; Humans; Male; Quality of Life
PubMed: 32710160
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-020-05548-0 -
Tropical Doctor Oct 2020While adoption of the Ponseti method has continued gradually, its use to manage patients with congenital talipes equinovarus (CTEV) has been limited in low- and...
While adoption of the Ponseti method has continued gradually, its use to manage patients with congenital talipes equinovarus (CTEV) has been limited in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) for a number of reasons including a lack of clinical training on technique and lack of appropriate clinical equipment. There are a frequent number of emerging studies that report on the role of clubfoot training programmes; however, little is known in regard to cumulative benefits.A systematic review was undertaken through Medline, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science for studies analysing clubfoot training programmes. There were no limitations on time, up until the review was commenced on January 2020. The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO as 165657. Ten articles complied with the inclusion criteria and were deemed fit for analysis. Training programmes lasted an average of 2-3 days. There was a reported increase in knowledge of applying the Ponseti method in managing clubfoot by participants (four studies < 0.05). Skill retention was examined by multiple choice (MCQ) examination style questions before and after the training programme in two studies; both showed an improvement (MCQ answers improved from 59% to 73%). All studies showed an improvement in participants' self-reported understanding of the Ponseti method and confidence in its use in future practice ( < 0.05). There were improved benefits of knowledge and clinical application of the Ponseti method by participants in the programmes in all studies examined. However, there was a significant lack of follow-up and exploration of long-term effects of these programmes. Implementing training programmes based on perceived benefits rather than actual long-term benefits may have a negative impact on healthcare delivery and patient management in LMICs.
Topics: Clubfoot; Developing Countries; Female; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Male; Manipulation, Orthopedic; Patient Education as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32571163
DOI: 10.1177/0049475520931343 -
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies Jun 2020To investigate for congenital muscular torticollis (CMT) and positional plagiocephaly (PP) the effectiveness and safety of manual therapy, repositioning and helmet...
The effectiveness and safety of conservative interventions for positional plagiocephaly and congenital muscular torticollis: a synthesis of systematic reviews and guidance.
AIM
To investigate for congenital muscular torticollis (CMT) and positional plagiocephaly (PP) the effectiveness and safety of manual therapy, repositioning and helmet therapy (PP only) using a systematic review of systematic reviews and national guidelines.
METHODS
We searched four major relevant databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and MANTIS for research studies published between the period 1999-2019. Inclusion criteria were systematic reviews that analysed results from multiple studies and guidelines that used evidence and expert opinion to recommend treatment and care approaches. Three reviewers independently selected articles by title, abstract and full paper review, and extracted data. Selected studies were described by two authors and assessed for quality. Where possible meta-analysed data for change in outcomes (range of movement and head shape) were extracted and qualitative conclusions were assessed.
RESULTS
We found 10 systematic reviews for PP and 4 for CMT. One national guideline was found for each PP and CMT. For PP, manual therapy was found to be more effective than repositioning including tummy time (moderate to high evidence) but not better than helmet therapy (low evidence). Helmet therapy was better than usual care or repositioning (low evidence); and repositioning better than usual care (moderate to high evidence). The results for CMT showed that manual therapy in the form of practitioner-led stretching had moderate favourable evidence for increased range of movement. Advice, guidance and parental support was recommended in all the guidance to reassure parents of the favourable trajectory and nature of these conditions over time.
CONCLUSIONS
Distinguishing between superiority of treatments was difficult due to the lack of standardised measurement systems, the variety of outcomes and limited high quality studies. More well powered effectiveness and efficacy studies are needed. However overall, advice and guidance on repositioning (including tummy-time) and practitioner-led stretching were low risk, potentially helpful and inexpensive interventions for parents to consider.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019139074.
Topics: Head Protective Devices; Humans; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Plagiocephaly, Nonsynostotic; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Torticollis
PubMed: 32522230
DOI: 10.1186/s12998-020-00321-w -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2019In the absence of bleeding, plasma is commonly transfused to people prophylactically to prevent bleeding. In this context, it is transfused before operative or invasive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In the absence of bleeding, plasma is commonly transfused to people prophylactically to prevent bleeding. In this context, it is transfused before operative or invasive procedures (such as liver biopsy or chest drainage tube insertion) in those considered at increased risk of bleeding, typically defined by abnormalities of laboratory tests of coagulation. As plasma contains procoagulant factors, plasma transfusion may reduce perioperative bleeding risk. This outcome has clinical importance given that perioperative bleeding and blood transfusion have been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Plasma is expensive, and some countries have experienced issues with blood product shortages, donor pool reliability, and incomplete screening for transmissible infections. Thus, although the benefit of prophylactic plasma transfusion has not been well established, plasma transfusion does carry potentially life-threatening risks.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic plasma transfusion for people with coagulation test abnormalities (in the absence of inherited bleeding disorders or use of anticoagulant medication) requiring non-cardiac surgery or invasive procedures.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), without language or publication status restrictions in: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017 Issue 7); Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946); Ovid Embase (from 1974); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; EBSCOHost) (from 1937); PubMed (e-publications and in-process citations ahead of print only); Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950); Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (from 1982); Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (Thomson Reuters, from 1990); ClinicalTrials.gov; and World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Search Platform (ICTRP) to 28 January 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing: prophylactic plasma transfusion to placebo, intravenous fluid, or no intervention; prophylactic plasma transfusion to alternative pro-haemostatic agents; or different haemostatic thresholds for prophylactic plasma transfusion. We included participants of any age, and we excluded trials incorporating individuals with previous active bleeding, with inherited bleeding disorders, or taking anticoagulant medication before enrolment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five trials in this review, all were conducted in high-income countries. Three additional trials are ongoing. One trial compared fresh frozen plasma (FFP) transfusion with no transfusion given. One trial compared FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion given. One trial compared FFP transfusion with administration of alternative pro-haemostatic agents (factors II, IX, and X followed by VII). One trial compared the use of different transfusion triggers using the international normalised ratio measurement. One trial compared the use of a thromboelastographic-guided transfusion trigger using standard laboratory measurements of coagulation. Four trials enrolled only adults, whereas the fifth trial did not specify participant age. Four trials included only minor procedures that could be performed by the bedside. Only one trial included some participants undergoing major surgical operations. Two trials included only participants in intensive care. Two trials included only participants with liver disease. Three trials did not recruit sufficient participants to meet their pre-calculated sample size. Overall, the quality of evidence was low to very low across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology, due to risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision. One trial was stopped after recruiting two participants, therefore this review's findings are based on the remaining four trials (234 participants). When plasma transfusion was compared with no transfusion given, we are very uncertain whether there was a difference in 30-day mortality (1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 1.10; very low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding within 24 hours (1 trial comparing FFP transfusion vs no transfusion, 76 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.93; very low-quality evidence; 1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.28 to 8.93; very low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in the number of blood product transfusions per person (1 trial, 76 participants; study authors reported no difference; very low-quality evidence) or in the number of people requiring transfusion (1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; study authors reported no blood transfusion given; very low-quality evidence) or in the risk of transfusion-related adverse events (acute lung injury) (1 trial, 76 participants; study authors reported no difference; very low-quality evidence). When plasma transfusion was compared with other pro-haemostatic agents, we are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding (1 trial; 21 participants; no events; very low-quality evidence) or in transfusion-related adverse events (febrile or allergic reactions) (1 trial, 21 participants; RR 9.82, 95% CI 0.59 to 162.24; very low-quality evidence). When different triggers for FFP transfusion were compared, the number of people requiring transfusion may have been reduced (for overall blood products) when a thromboelastographic-guided transfusion trigger was compared with standard laboratory tests (1 trial, 60 participants; RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding (1 trial, 60 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low-quality evidence) or in transfusion-related adverse events (allergic reactions) (1 trial; 60 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low-quality evidence). Only one trial reported 30-day mortality. No trials reported procedure-related harmful events (excluding bleeding) or quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Review findings show uncertainty for the utility and safety of prophylactic FFP use. This is due to predominantly very low-quality evidence that is available for its use over a range of clinically important outcomes, together with lack of confidence in the wider applicability of study findings, given the paucity or absence of study data in settings such as major body cavity surgery, extensive soft tissue surgery, orthopaedic surgery, or neurosurgery. Therefore, from the limited RCT evidence, we can neither support nor oppose the use of prophylactic FFP in clinical practice.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Blood Component Transfusion; Hemorrhage; Hemostatics; Humans; Plasma; Preoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Procedures, Operative; Thrombelastography
PubMed: 31778223
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012745.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2019People who have chronic kidney disease (CKD) have important changes to bone structure, strength, and metabolism. Children experience bone deformity, pain, and delayed or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
People who have chronic kidney disease (CKD) have important changes to bone structure, strength, and metabolism. Children experience bone deformity, pain, and delayed or impaired growth. Adults experience limb and vertebral fractures, avascular necrosis, and pain. The fracture risk after kidney transplantation is four times that of the general population and is related to Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD) occurring with end-stage kidney failure, steroid-induced bone loss, and persistent hyperparathyroidism after transplantation. Fractures may reduce quality of life and lead to being unable to work or contribute to community roles and responsibilities. Earlier versions of this review have found low certainty evidence for effects of treatment. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and updated in 2007.
OBJECTIVES
This review update evaluates the benefits and harms of interventions for preventing bone disease following kidney transplantation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 16 May 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs and quasi-RCTs evaluating treatments for bone disease among kidney transplant recipients of any age were eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed trial risks of bias and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using random effects meta-analysis. The risk estimates were expressed as a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes together with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary efficacy outcome was bone fracture. The primary safety outcome was acute graft rejection. Secondary outcomes included death (all cause and cardiovascular), myocardial infarction, stroke, musculoskeletal disorders (e.g. skeletal deformity, bone pain), graft loss, nausea, hyper- or hypocalcaemia, kidney function, serum parathyroid hormone (PTH), and bone mineral density (BMD).
MAIN RESULTS
In this 2019 update, 65 studies (involving 3598 participants) were eligible; 45 studies contributed data to our meta-analyses (2698 participants). Treatments included bisphosphonates, vitamin D compounds, teriparatide, denosumab, cinacalcet, parathyroidectomy, and calcitonin. Median duration of follow-up was 12 months. Forty-three studies evaluated bone density or bone-related biomarkers, with more recent studies evaluating proteinuria and hyperparathyroidism. Bisphosphonate therapy was usually commenced in the perioperative transplantation period (within 3 weeks) and regardless of BMD. Risks of bias were generally high or unclear leading to lower certainty in the results. A single study reported outcomes among 60 children and adolescents. Studies were not designed to measure treatment effects on fracture, death or cardiovascular outcomes, or graft loss.Compared to placebo, bisphosphonate therapy administered over 12 months in transplant recipients may prevent fracture (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.01; low certainty evidence) although the 95% CI included the possibility that bisphosphonate therapy might make little or no difference. Fracture events were principally vertebral fractures identified during routine radiographic surveillance. It was uncertain whether any other drug class decreased fracture (low or very low certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether interventions for bone disease in kidney transplantation reduce all-cause or cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke, or graft loss in very low certainty evidence. Bisphosphonate therapy may decrease acute graft rejection (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89; low certainty evidence), while it is uncertain whether any other treatment impacts graft rejection (very low certainty evidence). Bisphosphonate therapy may reduce bone pain (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.93; very low certainty evidence), while it was very uncertain whether bisphosphonates prevent spinal deformity or avascular bone necrosis (very low certainty evidence). Bisphosphonates may increase to risk of hypocalcaemia (RR 5.59, 95% CI 1.00 to 31.06; low certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether vitamin D compounds had any effect on skeletal, cardiovascular, death, or transplant function outcomes (very low certainty or absence of evidence). Evidence for the benefits and harms of all other treatments was of very low certainty. Evidence for children and young adolescents was sparse.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Bisphosphonate therapy may reduce fracture and bone pain after kidney transplantation, however low certainty in the evidence indicates it is possible that treatment may make little or no difference. It is uncertain whether bisphosphonate therapy or other bone treatments prevent other skeletal complications after kidney transplantation, including spinal deformity or avascular bone necrosis. The effects of bone treatment for children and adolescents after kidney transplantation are very uncertain.
PubMed: 31637698
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005015.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic, inflammatory, autoimmune disease that results in joint deformity and immobility of the musculoskeletal system. The...
BACKGROUND
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic, inflammatory, autoimmune disease that results in joint deformity and immobility of the musculoskeletal system. The major goals of treatment are to relieve pain, reduce inflammation, slow down or stop joint damage, prevent disability, and preserve or improve the person's sense of well-being and ability to function. Tai Chi, interchangeably known as Tai Chi Chuan, is an ancient Chinese health-promoting martial art form that has been recognized in China as an effective arthritis therapy for centuries. This is an update of a review published in 2004.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of Tai Chi as a treatment for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
SEARCH METHODS
We updated the search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and clinical trial registries from 2002 to September 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials examining the benefits (ACR improvement criteria or pain, disease progression, function, and radiographic progression), and harms (adverse events and withdrawals) of exercise programs with Tai Chi instruction or incorporating principles of Tai Chi philosophy. We included studies of any duration that included control groups who received either no therapy or alternate therapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
Adding three studies (156 additional participants) to the original review, this update contains a total of seven trials with 345 participants. Participants were mostly women with RA, ranging in age from 16 to 80 years, who were treated in outpatient settings in China, South Korea, and the USA. The majority of the trials were at high risk of bias for performance and detection bias, due to the lack of blinding of participants or assessors. Almost 75% of the studies did not report random sequence generation, and we judged the risk of bias as unclear for allocation concealment in the majority of studies. The duration of the Tai Chi programs ranged from 8 to 12 weeks.It is uncertain whether Tai Chi-based exercise programs provide a clinically important improvement in pain among Tai Chi participants compared to no therapy or alternate therapy. The change in mean pain in control groups, measured on visual analog scale (VAS 0 to 10 score, reduced score means less pain) ranged from a decrease of 0.51 to an increase of 1.6 at 12 weeks; in the Tai Chi groups, pain was reduced by a mean difference (MD) of -2.15 (95% confidence interval (CI) -3.19 to -1.11); 22% absolute improvement (95% CI, 11% to 32% improvement); 2 studies, 81 participants; very low-quality evidence, downgraded for imprecision, blinding and attrition bias.There was very low-quality evidence, downgraded for, blinding, and attrition, that was inconclusive for an important difference in disease activity, measured using Disease Activity Scale (DAS-28-ESR) scores (0 to 10 scale, lower score means less disease activity), with no change in the control group and 0.40 reduction (95% CI -1.10 to 0.30) with Tai Chi; 4% absolute improvement (95% CI 11% improvement to 3% worsening); 1 study, 43 participants.For the assessment of function, the change in mean Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ; 0 to 3 scale, lower score means better function) ranged from 0 to 0.1 in the control group, and reduced by MD 0.33 in the Tai Chi group (95% CI -0.79 to 0.12); 11% absolute improvement (95% CI 26% improvement to 4% worsening); 2 studies, 63 participants; very low-quality evidence, downgraded for imprecision, blinding, and attrition. We are unsure of an important improvement, as the results were inconclusive.Participants in Tai Chi programs were less likely than those in a control group to withdraw from studies at 8 to 12 weeks (19/180 in intervention groups versus 49/165 in control groups; risk ratio (RR) 0.40 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.86); absolute difference 17% fewer (95% CI 30% fewer to 3% fewer); 7 studies, 289 participants; low-quality evidence, downgraded for imprecision and blinding.There were no data available for radiographic progression. Short-term adverse events were not reported by group, but in two studies there was some narrative description of joint and muscle soreness and cramps; long-term adverse events were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It is uncertain whether Tai Chi has any effect on clinical outcomes (joint pain, activity limitation, function) in RA, and important effects cannot be confirmed or excluded, since all outcomes had very low-quality evidence. Withdrawals from study were greater in the control groups than the Tai Chi groups, based on low-quality evidence. Although the incidence of adverse events is likely to be low with Tai Chi, we are uncertain, as studies failed to explicitly report such events. Few minor adverse events (joint and muscle soreness and cramps) were described qualitatively in the narrative of two of the studies. This updated review provides minimal change in the conclusions from the previous review, i.e. a pain outcome.
Topics: Arthralgia; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Exercise Movement Techniques; Humans; Pain Management; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tai Ji
PubMed: 31553478
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004849.pub2 -
Global Spine Journal Sep 2019Systematic review (Level 4). (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review (Level 4).
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the demographics, clinical presentations, and conditions associated with butterfly vertebrae.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed of multiple databases. A total of 279 articles were identified for screening. Case series or case reports of butterfly vertebrae with adequate clinical detail were complied.
RESULTS
Eighty-two total articles (109 patients) were selected for final inclusion. Sixty-one percent of patients presented with a single butterfly vertebra, while 39% were multiple. The most common location for butterfly vertebrae was T1. Fifty-six percent of cases were associated with a syndrome, the most common being spondylocostal dysostosis. The presence of multiple butterfly vertebra was strongly associated with a syndrome or additional anomalies ( < .001). Overall, the most common presenting complaint was low back pain. Seventy percent of patients had associated spinal disease. Other organ systems affected included musculoskeletal (43%), craniofacial (30%), neurologic (27%), cardiovascular (24%), genitourinary (23%), gastrointestinal (22%), laboratory abnormality (16%), and endocrine (9%).
CONCLUSIONS
This study is the largest collection of butterfly vertebrae cases to date. Butterfly vertebrae are associated with spinal deformity and multiple butterfly vertebrae may indicate a syndromic illness. Low back pain or disc herniation may occur with lumbar butterfly vertebrae however the etiology of this phenomena has not been rigorously explained. Many diseases and syndromes are associated with butterfly vertebrae.
PubMed: 31448202
DOI: 10.1177/2192568218801016 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2019Osteoarthritis affecting the knee is common and represents a continuum of disease from early cartilage thinning to full-thickness cartilage loss, bony erosion, and...
BACKGROUND
Osteoarthritis affecting the knee is common and represents a continuum of disease from early cartilage thinning to full-thickness cartilage loss, bony erosion, and deformity. Many studies do not stratify their results based on the severity of the disease at baseline or recruitment.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of surgical intervention for the management of symptomatic mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis defined as knee pain and radiographic evidence of non-end stage osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grade 1, 2, 3 or equivalent on MRI/arthroscopy). Outcomes of interest included pain, function, radiographic progression, quality of life, short-term serious adverse events, re-operation rates and withdrawals due to adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase up to May 2018. We also conducted searches of ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. Authors of trials were contacted if some but not all their participants appeared to fit our inclusion criteria.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials that compared surgery to non-surgical interventions (including sham and placebo control groups, exercise or physiotherapy, and analgesic or other medication), injectable therapies, and trials that compared one type of surgical intervention to another surgical intervention in people with symptomatic mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data using standardised forms. We analysed the quality of evidence using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of five studies involving 566 participants were identified as eligible for this review. Single studies compared arthroscopic partial meniscectomy to physical therapy (320 participants), arthroscopic surgery (debridement ± synovectomy ± chondroplasty) to closed needle joint lavage with saline (32 participants) and high tibial osteotomy surgery to knee joint distraction surgery (62 participants). Two studies (152 participants) compared arthroscopic surgery (washout ± debridement; debridement) to a hyaluronic acid injection. Only one study was at low risk of selection bias, and due to the difficulty of blinding participants to their treatment, all studies were at risk of performance and detection bias.Reporting of results in this summary has been restricted to the primary comparison: surgical intervention versus non-surgical intervention.A single study, included 320 participants with symptoms consistent with meniscal tear. All subjects had the meniscal tear confirmed on knee MRI and radiographic evidence of mild to moderate osteoarthritis (osteophytes, cartilage defect or joint space narrowing). Patients with severe osteoarthritis (KL grade 4) were excluded. The study compared arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and physical therapy to physical therapy alone (a six-week individualised progressive home exercise program). This study was at low risk of selection bias and outcome reporting biases, but was susceptible to performance and detection biases. A high rate of cross-over (30.2%) occurred from the physical therapy group to the arthroscopic group.Low-quality evidence suggests there may be little difference in pain and function at 12 months follow-up in people who have arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and those who have physical therapy. Evidence was downgraded to low quality due to risk of bias and imprecision.Mean pain was 19.3 points on a 0 to 100 point KOOS pain scale with physical therapy at 12 months follow-up and was 0.2 points better with surgery (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.05 better to 3.65 points worse with surgery, an absolute improvement of 0.2% (95% CI 4% better to 4% worse) and relative improvement 0.4% (95% CI 9% better to 8% worse) (low quality evidence). Mean function was 14.5 on a 0 to 100 point KOOS function scale with physical therapy at 12 months follow-up and 0.8 points better with surgery (95% CI 4.3 better to 2.7 worse); 0.8% absolute improvement (95% CI 4% better to 3% worse) and 2.1% relative improvement (95% CI 11% better to 7% worse) (low quality evidence).Radiographic structural osteoarthritis progression and quality of life outcomes were not reported.Due to very low quality evidence, we are uncertain if surgery is associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events, incidence of total knee replacement or withdrawal rates. Evidence was downgraded twice due to very low event rates, and once for risk of bias.At 12 months, the surgery group had a total of three serious adverse events including fatal pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction and hypoxaemia. The physical therapy alone group had two serious adverse events including sudden death and stroke (Peto OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.27 to 9.21); 1% more events with surgery (95% CI 2% less to 3% more) and 58% relative change (95% CI 73% less to 821% more). One participant in each group withdrew due to adverse events.Two of 164 participants (1.2%) in the physical therapy group and three of 156 in the surgery group underwent conversion to total knee replacement within 12 months (Peto OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.43 to 7.13); 1% more events with surgery (95% CI 2% less to 5% more); 76% relative change (95% CI 57% less to 613% more).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The review found no placebo-or sham-controlled trials of surgery in participants with symptomatic mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. There was low quality evidence that there may be no evidence of a difference between arthroscopic partial meniscectomy surgery and a home exercise program for the treatment of this condition. Similarly, low-quality evidence from a few small trials indicates there may not be any benefit of arthroscopic surgery over other non-surgical treatments including saline irrigation and hyaluronic acid injection, or one type of surgery over another. We are uncertain of the risk of adverse events or of progressing to total knee replacement due to very small event rates. Thus, there is uncertainty around the current evidence to support or oppose the use of surgery in mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. As no benefit has been demonstrated from the low quality trials included in this review, it is possible that future higher quality trials for these surgical interventions may not contradict these results.
Topics: Arthroscopy; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain Measurement; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 31322289
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012128.pub2 -
Cartilage Dec 2021The purpose of this systematic review is to determine (1) current reported treatment options for isolated tibial plateau (TP) cartilage lesions, (2) patient reported...
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this systematic review is to determine (1) current reported treatment options for isolated tibial plateau (TP) cartilage lesions, (2) patient reported outcomes following various treatments, and (3) complication rate and survivorship following various treatments.
DESIGN
A literature search of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL was conducted adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Patients were included if they had TP cartilage lesions treated with surgery. Lesion characteristics, surgical procedure details, patient reported outcomes, complication, and failure rates were collected.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies yielded 205 knees with TP cartilage lesions treated surgically. Ages ranged from 12 to 77 years. Surgical techniques included 138 treated with osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCA), 37 treated with osteochondral autograft transfer system (OATS), 11 treated with microfracture, 11 treated with an osteochondral scaffold, and 8 treated with autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). The patient-reported outcome measures were heterogeneous, but all reported improvements with the notable exception of one study evaluating microfracture. The rate of complications ranged from 0% to 4.6%. Failure rate ranged from 22% to 46% for OCA and 0% to 16% for OATS. No failures were reported for the additional techniques.
CONCLUSIONS
Various surgical techniques have been utilized for the treatment of TP cartilage lesions. Patient-reported outcome measures were heterogeneous, but improvements were reported following all surgical treatments except for microfracture, which resulted in decreased scores at mid-term follow-up. The complication rate was low for all techniques described. However, the failure rate was higher following unicondylar OCA for salvage treatment of posttraumatic deformities.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Allografts; Autografts; Cartilage, Articular; Child; Chondrocytes; Fractures, Stress; Humans; Intra-Articular Fractures; Knee Injuries; Knee Joint; Middle Aged; Tibia; Transplantation, Autologous; Young Adult
PubMed: 31204491
DOI: 10.1177/1947603519855767