-
Danish Medical Journal Jun 2024In orthopaedics, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions are among the most common surgical interventions. Two methods are preferably used: autografts from the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
In orthopaedics, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions are among the most common surgical interventions. Two methods are preferably used: autografts from the hamstring tendon (HT) or patella tendon (PT). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare these two methods when returning to sports.
METHODS
Eleven studies were included based on a literature search conducted in PubMed. The primary outcome was return to preinjury sport level in athletes. Post-operative results such as the Lysholm score, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, the Tegner Activity Score and KT-1000 arthrometry and autograft re-rupture rates were analysed as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
The analysis showed no significant difference in return to preinjury sports level at a two-year follow-up between patients operated with hamstring or patella autograft. Considering the secondary outcomes, no significant differences were recorded in Lysholm score, IKDC score or re-rupture rate. The Tegner Activity Scale demonstrated a significantly higher activity level in the PT group than in the HT group (OR 0.79, p = 0.003). At the two-year follow-up, the KT-1000 arthrometer analysis also showed a significant difference in laxity, which was higher for the HT autografts (OR -0.31, p = 0.02).
CONCLUSION
This study showed no significant differences between hamstring and patella autografts. Even so, the choice of method when operated for ACL rupture remains crucial for the individual and should be a weighted decision made jointly by the patient and the physician.
Topics: Humans; Return to Sport; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Hamstring Tendons; Patellar Ligament; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Autografts; Transplantation, Autologous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38903025
DOI: 10.61409/A09230599 -
World Neurosurgery: X Jul 2024A wide variety of materials are used for lumbar interbody fusion, but there is no unified consensus on the superiority of one material over another. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
A wide variety of materials are used for lumbar interbody fusion, but there is no unified consensus on the superiority of one material over another. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare and rank the various TLIF interbody materials based on fusion rates.
METHODS
We queried PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus from inception until August 2023, in which 2135 studies were identified. Inclusion criteria were applied based on the PRISMA guidelines. The fusion assessment employed the Bridwell's criteria with a length of follow-up of at least 12 months. The NMA was conducted to compare multiple approaches from multiple studies using the frequentist framework with STATA16.
RESULTS
In total, 13 TLIF studies involving 1919 patients with 1981 lumbar interbody levels fulfilled our eligibility criteria. Seven different cage materials were utilized: polyetheretherketone (PEEK, as the reference), allograft, autograft, PEEK with titanium coating (TiPEEK), titanium, carbon/carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) and 3D-printed titanium. The average patient age was 60.9 ( = 7.5) years old. When compared to PEEK, the other six materials did not have a significantly different rate of lumbar fusion. However, the SUCRA number of the 3D-printed titanium, TiPEEK, Ti, allograft, autograft, CFRP, and PEEK were 0.8, 0.6, 0.5, 0.5, 0.4, 0.4, and 0.3 consecutively.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on a network meta-analysis within the confines of our clinical study, 3D-printed titanium interbody cage may promote the highest success rate of fusion while PEEK may be the material with the least success rate of fusion in TLIF.
PubMed: 38884030
DOI: 10.1016/j.wnsx.2024.100392 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Jun 2024Several approaches to surgical techniques and graft types exist in posterolateral corner (PLC) reconstruction. The literature lacks knowledge regarding outcomes after... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Several approaches to surgical techniques and graft types exist in posterolateral corner (PLC) reconstruction. The literature lacks knowledge regarding outcomes after autograft versus allograft reconstruction for PLC injuries.
PURPOSE
To comprehensively review the current literature on PLC reconstruction and compare outcomes between autograft and allograft tissues.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
The PubMed and Scopus online databases were searched with the terms "PLC,""posterolateral knee,""posterolateral corner," and "reconstruction" in varying combinations. Patient characteristics, graft type, graft failure, surgical techniques, functional outcome scores, and varus laxity on stress radiographs were reviewed and compared between PLC reconstruction with autografts versus allografts.
RESULTS
Included were 22 studies comprising 33 cohorts: 16 autografts (n = 280 knees) and 17 allografts (336 knees). There were 69 isolated PLC reconstructions (58 allografts and 11 autografts) and 493 multiligament reconstructions (269 autografts and 224 allografts). There was no difference in the mean patient age (30.5 vs 33.5 years, respectively; = .11) or mean follow-up (39.5 vs 37.7 months, respectively; = .68) between the autograft and allograft groups. There was no evidence to suggest a difference in graft failures between graft types (pooled mean autograft vs allograft: 0.44 vs 0.41 failures; = .95). There was a significant difference in the mean postoperative Lysholm scores for autografts versus allografts (89.6 vs 85.5, respectively; = .04). There was no difference between the cohorts in preoperative or postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores or postoperative varus laxity.
CONCLUSION
Our review and meta-analysis indicated no significant differences in graft failure rates or objective outcomes after PLC reconstruction based on graft type alone. There was a significant difference in postoperative Lysholm scores in favor of the autograft group and no significant difference in IKDC subjective scores.
PubMed: 38840793
DOI: 10.1177/23259671241247542 -
Journal of Orthopaedics Oct 2024Hypermobility describes the movement of joints beyond normal limits. Whether hypermobility predisposes to patellar instability is yet to be established. We aimed to... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Hypermobility describes the movement of joints beyond normal limits. Whether hypermobility predisposes to patellar instability is yet to be established. We aimed to determine if joint hypermobility leads to an increased risk of patellar instability, and to evaluate outcomes of treatment for patellar instability in those who exhibit hypermobility.
METHODS
Published and unpublished literature databases were searched to September 7, 2023. Studies comparing prevalence of patellar dislocation/differences in treatment outcomes in patients with and without hypermobility were included.
RESULTS
We identified 18 eligible studies (4,391 patients). The evidence was low in quality. A case series on 82 patients found that there was a relationship between generalised joint laxity and patellar instability. This was corroborated by a study comparing 104 patients with patellar dislocation to 110 patients without. Prevalence of generalised joint laxity was six time higher in the former (64.4% vs 10.9%, p < 0.001).Five studies found surgical intervention aimed at correcting patellar dislocation in patients with idiopathic hypermobility led to satisfactory outcomes. There was conflicting evidence regarding if hypermobile patients have worse outcomes than non-hypermobile patients following medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLR) in two studies. In addition, this procedure had a 19.1% failure rate in patients with Ehlers Danlos Syndrome (EDS), with hypermobility associated with a higher failure rate (p = 0.03). One study showed the type of graft used made no difference in outcome scores or re-dislocation rates (p > 0.5). Another study had 7/31 (22.6%) autografts which failed, compared to 2/16 allografts (12.5%) (p = 0.69).
CONCLUSION
Joint hypermobility is a risk factor for patellar instability. Identification of at-risk groups may aid prevention of dislocations and allow for appropriate treatment. Patients with EDS experience poor outcomes following patellar stabilization surgery, with post-operative monitoring required.
PubMed: 38784948
DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.05.009 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine May 2024The timing of return to work (RTW) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) is a less studied milestone compared with return to sports. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The timing of return to work (RTW) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) is a less studied milestone compared with return to sports.
PURPOSE
To systematically review the rate and postoperative timing of RTW after ACLR.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
This study was conducted in accordance with the 2020 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Ovid databases for clinical studies reporting RTW after ACLR, and 806 studies were identified in August 2022. A quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index of Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) grading system. The following data were extracted from studies: study characteristics, cohort demographics, ACLR technique, concomitant meniscal and/or cartilage procedures, preoperative patient-reported outcomes, rates of RTW, and days required for RTW after ACLR.
RESULTS
A total of 13 studies met inclusion criteria, totaling 1791 patients (86.4% male). Wide variability was observed in the methodological quality of the assessed studies (MINORS score range, 8-17). Hamstring tendon (HT) autograft was used in 76.8% (n = 1377; mean age, 30.5 years old), allograft in 17.1% (n = 308; mean age, 33.1 years old), the ligament advanced reinforcement system in 2.5% (n = 46; mean age, 33.2 years old), bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft in 2% (n = 36; mean age, 28.5 years old), and quadriceps tendon autograft in 1.3% (n = 24; mean age, 24.1 years old). Among the included patients, 99.1% (n = 1781) reported successful RTW after surgery. The mean time to RTW was 84.2 days (range, 31.4-107.1 days) for HT and 69.5 days (range, 49-56.6 days) for allograft.
CONCLUSION
While data regarding work intensity before and after ACL injury were absent, our study results suggested that patients most often RTW within 90 days of surgery. Patients with allograft ACLR may RTW earlier than patients undergoing ACLR with HT autograft.
PubMed: 38745916
DOI: 10.1177/23259671241249086 -
Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and... Apr 2024To review the literature reporting on complications and failure rates after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in patients ≥40 years. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To review the literature reporting on complications and failure rates after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in patients ≥40 years.
METHODS
This was a secondary analysis from a prior systematic review of the MEDLINE, CINAHL, SportDiscus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases on studies evaluating clinical outcomes in ACLR patients ≥40 years. Studies were included based on the following criteria: English-language studies reporting on postoperative complications and/or ACLR failure rates in patients ≥40 years. Case reports, technical notes, studies with duplicate reporting of patient cohorts, or studies using publicly available registry data were excluded. ACLR failure definitions, failure rates, graft rupture rates, revision ACLR and non-ACLR revision rates, and complication rates were recorded.
RESULTS
Twenty-one studies were included following full-text review. Autografts were used in 89.0% of cases. Definitions for ACLR failure varied, ranging from (1) revision ACLR, (2) graft rupture, (3) clinical examination of increased knee laxity, and (4) postoperative arthrofibrosis requiring an additional surgery. The median ACLR failure rate was 5.0% (range, 0%-12.1%) among the 9 studies reporting this outcome, with only 4 of the studies providing explicit definitions of failure. The median ACLR revision surgery, graft rupture, and non-ACLR revision surgery rates were 0% (range, 0%-7.7%), 2.7% (range, 0%-9.1%), and 7.2% (range 0%-34.4%), respectively. Commonly reported complications included pain (range, 0%-14.0%), stiffness (range, 0%-12.7%), hematoma (range, 2.5%-8.8%), neurovascular (range, 0%-41.7%), and undefined (range, 0%-13.8%).
CONCLUSIONS
ACLR in patients over 40 years old shows low failure rates.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.
PubMed: 38706974
DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100899 -
Journal of ISAKOS : Joint Disorders &... Apr 2024Anterolateral augmentation during primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may lower rates of ACL graft failure. However, differences in costs... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
Anterolateral augmentation during primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may lower rates of ACL graft failure. However, differences in costs between two techniques, lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR), are unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and subsequent cost-effectiveness analysis comparing LET versus ALLR in the setting of primary ACLR. The hypothesis was that LET is more cost-effective than ALLR.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A systematic review was conducted on studies in which patients underwent primary ACLR with a concomitant LET or ALLR with minimum 24 months follow-up published between January 2013 and July 2023. Primary outcomes included ACL graft failure rates and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey-Quality of Life (KOOS-QoL) subscale scores, which were used to determine health utilities measured by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. A decision tree model with one-way and two-way sensitivity analyses compared the cost of primary ACLR with a concomitant LET, independent autograft ALLR, or independent allograft ALLR. Costs were estimated using a combination of QALYs, institution prices, literature references, and a survey sent to 49 internationally recognized high-volume knee surgeons.
FINDINGS
A total of 2505 knees undergoing primary ACLR with concomitant LET (n=1162) or ALLR (n=1343) were identified from 22 studies. There were 77 total ACL graft failures with comparable failure rates between patients receiving LET versus ALLR (2.9% vs. 3.2%, P=0.690). The average QALYs gained was slightly higher for those who received LET (0.77) compared to ALLR (0.75). Survey results revealed a 5 minute longer median self-reported operative time for ALLR (20 min) than LET (15 min). The estimated costs for LET, autograft ALLR, and allograft ALLR were $1,015, $1,295, and $3,068, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Anterolateral augmentation during primary ACLR with LET is more cost-effective than independent autograft and allograft ALLR given the lower costs and comparable clinical outcomes. Surgeons may utilize this information when determining the optimal approach to anterolateral augmentation during primary ACLR, although differences in preferred technique and health care systems may influence operative efficiency and material costs.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Systematic review; Level of evidence, IV.
PubMed: 38604570
DOI: 10.1016/j.jisako.2024.04.004 -
BMJ Open Ophthalmology Apr 2024Pterygium is a common ocular surface disorder that requires surgical intervention for treatment. Conjunctival autografts are preferred over simple excision due to lower... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Modified sutureless and glue-free method versus conventional sutures for conjunctival autograft fixation in primary pterygium surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Pterygium is a common ocular surface disorder that requires surgical intervention for treatment. Conjunctival autografts are preferred over simple excision due to lower recurrence rates. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the modified sutureless glue-free (MSGF) method with conventional sutures (CS) for conjunctival autograft fixation in primary pterygium surgery.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MSGF and CS conjunctival autografts. Outcome measures included operation time, recurrence and postoperative complications. Standardised mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR) were used for continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively.
RESULTS
11 RCTs involving 833 participants were included. The analysis revealed that MSGF had a significantly shorter operation time compared with CS (SMD -3.704, 95% CI -5.122 to -2.287, p<0.001). CS was associated with a higher risk of foreign body sensation (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.74, p=0.01). MSGF was associated with a higher risk of graft dehiscence (RR 9.01, 95% CI 2.74 to 29.68, p=0.000) and graft retraction (RR 2.37, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.77, p=0.02). No significant differences were found in recurrence, graft haemorrhage, granuloma, Dellen and conjunctival oedema.
CONCLUSION
Using the MSGF technique in conjunctival autograft fixation for pterygium surgery reduces operation time by relying solely on the patient's blood for fixation. However, it increases the risk of graft dehiscence and retraction. However, CS is linked to a higher likelihood of experiencing foreign body sensations. Understanding the learning curve and surgeon familiarity with novel techniques is crucial for optimising patient care and surgical outcomes, while individualised decision-making is necessary considering the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Further research is warranted to minimise complications and optimise surgical outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Pterygium; Autografts; Fibrin Tissue Adhesive; Recurrence; Conjunctiva; Sutures; Foreign Bodies
PubMed: 38565231
DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2023-001621 -
Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and... Apr 2024To compare postoperative knee stability, functional outcomes, and complications after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using bone-patellar tendon-bone... (Review)
Review
Both Quadriceps and Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Autografts Improve Postoperative Stability and Functional Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.
PURPOSE
To compare postoperative knee stability, functional outcomes, and complications after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) versus quadriceps tendon autograft.
METHODS
In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies published in 2002 or later. Studies were included if they met the following criteria: randomized controlled trials that included patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with BPTB or quadriceps tendon autograft including all soft tissue and bone-quadriceps tendon and in which measures of postoperative stability and functional outcomes were reported. Studies that were not written in English and those that analyzed animals or cadavers, were not randomized controlled trials, or used other grafts (e.g., hamstring) were excluded.
RESULTS
The initial search identified 348 studies, 6 of which were included in this systematic review. Two of the six studies found no significant difference in performance outcomes or complications between quadriceps and BPTB autografts. One study found that patients receiving quadriceps autograft self-reported improved knee functional status compared with those receiving BPTB autograft. Another study found that quadriceps autograft resulted in a significantly reduced Quadriceps Index postoperatively compared with BPTB autograft (69.5 vs 82.8, = .01) but found no difference in postoperative quadriceps strength. An additional study found that the outcomes of quadriceps tendon and BPTB autografts were equivalent per the International Knee Documentation Committee scale, but anterior knee pain was less severe in patients with quadriceps tendon autograft. Furthermore, one study revealed the overall International Knee Documentation Committee score was reported as normal significantly more often in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with BPTB autograft (85% vs 50%, < .001) and that donor-site morbidity was greater in patients with quadriceps autograft. No significant difference was found in complications requiring reoperation across studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients undergoing ACL reconstruction with either BPTB or quadriceps tendon autograft reported improved postoperative knee stability and functional outcomes. There is no significant difference in complications between quadriceps autograft use and BPTB autograft use.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level III, systematic review of Level III retrospective studies.
PubMed: 38525287
DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100919 -
Cureus Feb 2024Burn injuries, a major global health concern, result in an estimated 180,000 fatalities annually. Despite tremendous progress in treatment methods over the years, the... (Review)
Review
Burn injuries, a major global health concern, result in an estimated 180,000 fatalities annually. Despite tremendous progress in treatment methods over the years, the morbidity and mortality associated with burns remain significant. Autologous skin grafting, particularly split-thickness skin grafting (STSG), has been a cornerstone in burn reconstruction, and it has facilitated survival and functional recovery for total body surface area (TBSA) significantly. However, the requirement for primary closure at the donor site due to the constraints of full-thickness donor harvesting continues to pose challenges. The introduction of dermal regenerative templates (DRT) in the late 1970s marked a substantial step forward in tissue engineering, addressing the inadequacy of dermal replacement with STSGs. This systematic review aimed to compare the outcomes of different graft types - bioengineered, autografts, allografts, and xenografts - in burn reconstruction over the last 24 years. The review focused on the pros and cons of each graft type, offering clinical insights grounded in experience and evidence. The approach involved a systematic review of studies published in English from January 2000 to January 2024, covering randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, case-control studies, and case series. The participants comprised individuals of all ages who underwent burn reconstruction with skin grafts, specifically split-thickness grafts, full-thickness grafts, composite grafts, and epidermal grafts (autografts, allografts, and xenografts) and bioengineered grafts. The primary outcomes were functional and cosmetic results, patient satisfaction, graft survival, and complications. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials version 2 (RoB 2), the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for non-randomized studies, and the Canada Institute for Health Economics (IHE) quality appraisal tool for case series. Our initial search yielded a total of 1,995 articles, out of which 10 studies were selected for final analysis. Among the four clinical trials assessed, 75% showed a high risk of bias. The studies reviewed involved various graft types, with six studies (60%) concentrating on allografts, three (30%) on autografts, and one (10%) on bioengineered skin grafts. The outcomes were varied, underlining the intricate nature of burn wound management. Our evaluation revealed promising results for autologous-engineered skin substitutes and allografts but also highlighted methodological disparities among the studies included. The dominance of observational studies and the diversity of outcome measures present obstacles to direct comparisons. Future research should address these limitations, employing well-structured RCTs, standardized outcome measures, and exploring long-term outcomes and patient-specific factors. The rapidly evolving field of regenerative medicine offers great potential for novel grafting methods. This systematic review provides valuable insights into the diverse outcomes of burn reconstruction using different graft types. Autologous-engineered skin substitutes and allografts seem to hold significant promise, suggesting a possible shift in grafting techniques. However, methodological inconsistencies and the lack of high-quality evidence underscore the necessity for further research to fine-tune burn care approaches.
PubMed: 38496152
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.54277