Siddarth Raj, Ali Ridha, Henry K.C. Searle, Chetan Khatri, Imran Ahmed, Andrew Metcalfe, Nicholas Smith
{"title":"四头肌腱与腘绳肌腱移植用于初级前交叉韧带重建:随机试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Siddarth Raj, Ali Ridha, Henry K.C. Searle, Chetan Khatri, Imran Ahmed, Andrew Metcalfe, Nicholas Smith","doi":"10.1016/j.knee.2024.07.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is most commonly performed with hamstring tendon (HT) or bone-patellar tendon–bone (BTB) autografts, although the quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft has recently increased in popularity. This systematic review and <em>meta</em>-analysis review compares QT and HT autografts for primary ACLR with a sole focus on randomised controlled trials (RCTs).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A prospective protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023427339). The search included MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science until February 2024. Only comparative RCTs were included. The primary outcome was the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form score. Secondary outcomes included: other validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), objective strength scores, complications, and return to sport and work.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>From 2,609 articles identified, seven were included (<em>n</em> = 474 patients). This <em>meta</em>-analysis did not identify a significant difference in post-operative IKDC scores (5 articles; <em>p</em> = 0.73), Lysholm scores (3 studies; <em>p</em> = 0.80) or Tegner activity scales (2 studies; <em>p</em> = 0.98). There were no differences in graft failure rates (4 studies; <em>p</em> = 0.92) or in overall adverse events (4 studies; <em>p</em> = 0.83) at 24 months post-ACLR as per <em>meta</em>-analysis. Donor site morbidity scores were significantly lower in the QT group (MD −4.67, 95% CI −9.29 to −0.05; 2 studies, 211 patients; <em>p</em> = 0.05, I<sup>2</sup> = 34%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There were no differences between QT and HT in PROMs, graft failure rates or overall complications based on low- to moderate-quality evidence. There may possibly be lower donor site morbidity with the QT autograft, however, the evidence is not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56110,"journal":{"name":"Knee","volume":"49 ","pages":"Pages 226-240"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quadriceps tendon versus hamstring tendon graft for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials\",\"authors\":\"Siddarth Raj, Ali Ridha, Henry K.C. Searle, Chetan Khatri, Imran Ahmed, Andrew Metcalfe, Nicholas Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.knee.2024.07.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is most commonly performed with hamstring tendon (HT) or bone-patellar tendon–bone (BTB) autografts, although the quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft has recently increased in popularity. This systematic review and <em>meta</em>-analysis review compares QT and HT autografts for primary ACLR with a sole focus on randomised controlled trials (RCTs).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A prospective protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023427339). The search included MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science until February 2024. Only comparative RCTs were included. The primary outcome was the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form score. Secondary outcomes included: other validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), objective strength scores, complications, and return to sport and work.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>From 2,609 articles identified, seven were included (<em>n</em> = 474 patients). This <em>meta</em>-analysis did not identify a significant difference in post-operative IKDC scores (5 articles; <em>p</em> = 0.73), Lysholm scores (3 studies; <em>p</em> = 0.80) or Tegner activity scales (2 studies; <em>p</em> = 0.98). There were no differences in graft failure rates (4 studies; <em>p</em> = 0.92) or in overall adverse events (4 studies; <em>p</em> = 0.83) at 24 months post-ACLR as per <em>meta</em>-analysis. Donor site morbidity scores were significantly lower in the QT group (MD −4.67, 95% CI −9.29 to −0.05; 2 studies, 211 patients; <em>p</em> = 0.05, I<sup>2</sup> = 34%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There were no differences between QT and HT in PROMs, graft failure rates or overall complications based on low- to moderate-quality evidence. There may possibly be lower donor site morbidity with the QT autograft, however, the evidence is not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56110,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Knee\",\"volume\":\"49 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 226-240\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Knee\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0968016024001005\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0968016024001005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Quadriceps tendon versus hamstring tendon graft for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials
Background
Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is most commonly performed with hamstring tendon (HT) or bone-patellar tendon–bone (BTB) autografts, although the quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft has recently increased in popularity. This systematic review and meta-analysis review compares QT and HT autografts for primary ACLR with a sole focus on randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods
A prospective protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023427339). The search included MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science until February 2024. Only comparative RCTs were included. The primary outcome was the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form score. Secondary outcomes included: other validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), objective strength scores, complications, and return to sport and work.
Results
From 2,609 articles identified, seven were included (n = 474 patients). This meta-analysis did not identify a significant difference in post-operative IKDC scores (5 articles; p = 0.73), Lysholm scores (3 studies; p = 0.80) or Tegner activity scales (2 studies; p = 0.98). There were no differences in graft failure rates (4 studies; p = 0.92) or in overall adverse events (4 studies; p = 0.83) at 24 months post-ACLR as per meta-analysis. Donor site morbidity scores were significantly lower in the QT group (MD −4.67, 95% CI −9.29 to −0.05; 2 studies, 211 patients; p = 0.05, I2 = 34%).
Conclusion
There were no differences between QT and HT in PROMs, graft failure rates or overall complications based on low- to moderate-quality evidence. There may possibly be lower donor site morbidity with the QT autograft, however, the evidence is not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions.
期刊介绍:
The Knee is an international journal publishing studies on the clinical treatment and fundamental biomechanical characteristics of this joint. The aim of the journal is to provide a vehicle relevant to surgeons, biomedical engineers, imaging specialists, materials scientists, rehabilitation personnel and all those with an interest in the knee.
The topics covered include, but are not limited to:
• Anatomy, physiology, morphology and biochemistry;
• Biomechanical studies;
• Advances in the development of prosthetic, orthotic and augmentation devices;
• Imaging and diagnostic techniques;
• Pathology;
• Trauma;
• Surgery;
• Rehabilitation.