开放式和经皮式方法对初级跟腱中段修复的生物力学效果相似:元分析

Jonathan Lawson M.S. , Rae Tarapore M.D. , Sean Sequeira M.D. , Casey Imbergamo M.D. , Mitchell Tarka M.D. , Gregory Guyton M.D. , Walter Hembree M.D. , Heath Gould M.D.
{"title":"开放式和经皮式方法对初级跟腱中段修复的生物力学效果相似:元分析","authors":"Jonathan Lawson M.S. ,&nbsp;Rae Tarapore M.D. ,&nbsp;Sean Sequeira M.D. ,&nbsp;Casey Imbergamo M.D. ,&nbsp;Mitchell Tarka M.D. ,&nbsp;Gregory Guyton M.D. ,&nbsp;Walter Hembree M.D. ,&nbsp;Heath Gould M.D.","doi":"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100924","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To evaluate the biomechanical properties of open versus percutaneous Achilles tendon repair.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic review of original research articles was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. To qualify for study inclusion, articles were required to be published in English, use a laboratory design using either human or animal tissue, and directly compare the biomechanical properties of open Achilles repair using a Krackow or Kessler technique with percutaneous repair using either a locking or nonlocking suture construct. The biomechanical outcomes evaluated were displacement (millimeters) and load to failure (Newtons).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, including 234 specimens (open: 97, percutaneous locking: 73; percutaneous nonlocking: 64) that underwent primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair. Pooled analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in displacement (<em>P</em> = .240) or load to failure (<em>P</em> = .912) between the open and percutaneous techniques. Among the percutaneous approaches, there was no difference in displacement (<em>P</em> = .109) between the locking and nonlocking tendon repair systems.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The results of this study suggest that both open and percutaneous techniques are biomechanically viable approaches for primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair.</p></div><div><h3>Clinical Relevance</h3><p>In clinical studies, similar rerupture rates have been observed after open or percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. It may be beneficial for surgeons to understand whether biomechanical differences exist between these repair techniques.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34631,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000427/pdfft?md5=54bcc0af3c3f4241142b6c396918101d&pid=1-s2.0-S2666061X24000427-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Open and Percutaneous Approaches Have Similar Biomechanical Results for Primary Midsubstance Achilles Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Lawson M.S. ,&nbsp;Rae Tarapore M.D. ,&nbsp;Sean Sequeira M.D. ,&nbsp;Casey Imbergamo M.D. ,&nbsp;Mitchell Tarka M.D. ,&nbsp;Gregory Guyton M.D. ,&nbsp;Walter Hembree M.D. ,&nbsp;Heath Gould M.D.\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100924\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To evaluate the biomechanical properties of open versus percutaneous Achilles tendon repair.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic review of original research articles was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. To qualify for study inclusion, articles were required to be published in English, use a laboratory design using either human or animal tissue, and directly compare the biomechanical properties of open Achilles repair using a Krackow or Kessler technique with percutaneous repair using either a locking or nonlocking suture construct. The biomechanical outcomes evaluated were displacement (millimeters) and load to failure (Newtons).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, including 234 specimens (open: 97, percutaneous locking: 73; percutaneous nonlocking: 64) that underwent primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair. Pooled analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in displacement (<em>P</em> = .240) or load to failure (<em>P</em> = .912) between the open and percutaneous techniques. Among the percutaneous approaches, there was no difference in displacement (<em>P</em> = .109) between the locking and nonlocking tendon repair systems.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The results of this study suggest that both open and percutaneous techniques are biomechanically viable approaches for primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair.</p></div><div><h3>Clinical Relevance</h3><p>In clinical studies, similar rerupture rates have been observed after open or percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. It may be beneficial for surgeons to understand whether biomechanical differences exist between these repair techniques.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34631,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000427/pdfft?md5=54bcc0af3c3f4241142b6c396918101d&pid=1-s2.0-S2666061X24000427-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000427\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000427","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估开放式与经皮跟腱修复术的生物力学特性。方法采用《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》指南对原始研究文章进行了系统综述。要符合纳入研究的条件,文章必须以英语发表,使用人体或动物组织进行实验室设计,并直接比较使用 Krackow 或 Kessler 技术进行跟腱开放式修复与使用锁定或非锁定缝合结构进行经皮修复的生物力学特性。结果12项研究符合纳入标准,包括234个样本(开放式:97个;经皮锁定式:73个;经皮非锁定式:64个),这些样本都接受了初级跟腱中层修复术。汇总分析表明,开放式和经皮技术在位移(P = .240)或失效载荷(P = .912)方面没有明显的统计学差异。在经皮方法中,锁定肌腱修复系统和非锁定肌腱修复系统在移位方面没有差异(P = .109)。结论本研究结果表明,开放式和经皮技术都是生物力学上可行的初级跟腱中层修复方法。外科医生了解这些修复技术之间是否存在生物力学差异可能会有所帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Open and Percutaneous Approaches Have Similar Biomechanical Results for Primary Midsubstance Achilles Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis

Purpose

To evaluate the biomechanical properties of open versus percutaneous Achilles tendon repair.

Methods

A systematic review of original research articles was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. To qualify for study inclusion, articles were required to be published in English, use a laboratory design using either human or animal tissue, and directly compare the biomechanical properties of open Achilles repair using a Krackow or Kessler technique with percutaneous repair using either a locking or nonlocking suture construct. The biomechanical outcomes evaluated were displacement (millimeters) and load to failure (Newtons).

Results

Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, including 234 specimens (open: 97, percutaneous locking: 73; percutaneous nonlocking: 64) that underwent primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair. Pooled analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in displacement (P = .240) or load to failure (P = .912) between the open and percutaneous techniques. Among the percutaneous approaches, there was no difference in displacement (P = .109) between the locking and nonlocking tendon repair systems.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that both open and percutaneous techniques are biomechanically viable approaches for primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair.

Clinical Relevance

In clinical studies, similar rerupture rates have been observed after open or percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. It may be beneficial for surgeons to understand whether biomechanical differences exist between these repair techniques.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
218
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊最新文献
Continuous Meniscal Repair Technique Allows for Shorter Operative Time and Learning Curve Compared With Traditional Vertical Mattress Technique in Controlled Arthroscopic Training in Porcine Model Concomitant Popliteomeniscal Fascicles Tears Are Found in 21% of Professional Soccer Players With Acute Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries Mini-Open Technique for Gluteus Medius Tendon Repairs Is Associated With Low Complication Rates and Sustained Improvement in Patient Reported Outcomes at 2-Year Follow-Up The Top-20 Studies About Anterior Shoulder Instability From an Altmetric Analysis Had Higher Levels of Evidence Than Those From a Traditional Bibliometric Analysis Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Augmented With a Reinforced Bioinductive Implant Is Biomechanically Similar to the Native Medial Patellofemoral Ligament at Time Zero in a Cadaveric Model
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1