髋关节唇臼修复与重建:元分析

Jean Tarchichi, Mohammad Daher, Ali Ghoul, Michel Estephan, Karl Boulos, Jad Mansour
{"title":"髋关节唇臼修复与重建:元分析","authors":"Jean Tarchichi, Mohammad Daher, Ali Ghoul, Michel Estephan, Karl Boulos, Jad Mansour","doi":"10.5371/hp.2024.36.3.168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the postoperative outcomes and complications of labral repair with those of labral reconstruction. An electronic search strategy was conducted from 1986 until August 2023 using the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20). The primary objectives included the postoperative clinical outcomes determined by the number of patients who reached minimal clinical important difference (MCID) on the visual analog scale (VAS), modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Life (HOS-ADL), and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12). In addition, analysis of the rate of revision arthroscopy, the rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), the postoperative VAS, mHHS, HOS-SS, HOS-ADL, iHOT-12, nonarthritic hip score (NAHS), patient satisfaction, lower extremity function scale (LEFS), and the SF-12 (12-item shortform) was also performed. Any differences arising between the investigators were resolved by discussion. Seventeen studies were relevant to the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. A higher rate of patients who reached MCID in the mHHS (<i>P</i>=0.02) as well as a higher rate of revision arthroscopy was observed for labral repair (<i>P</i>=0.03). The remaining studied outcomes were comparable. Despite the greater predictability of success in the reconstruction group, conduct of additional studies will be required for evaluation of the benefits of such findings. In addition, labral reconstruction is more technically demanding than a labral repair.</p>","PeriodicalId":73239,"journal":{"name":"Hip & pelvis","volume":"36 3","pages":"168-178"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11380542/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hip Labral Repair versus Reconstruction: Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jean Tarchichi, Mohammad Daher, Ali Ghoul, Michel Estephan, Karl Boulos, Jad Mansour\",\"doi\":\"10.5371/hp.2024.36.3.168\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the postoperative outcomes and complications of labral repair with those of labral reconstruction. An electronic search strategy was conducted from 1986 until August 2023 using the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20). The primary objectives included the postoperative clinical outcomes determined by the number of patients who reached minimal clinical important difference (MCID) on the visual analog scale (VAS), modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Life (HOS-ADL), and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12). In addition, analysis of the rate of revision arthroscopy, the rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), the postoperative VAS, mHHS, HOS-SS, HOS-ADL, iHOT-12, nonarthritic hip score (NAHS), patient satisfaction, lower extremity function scale (LEFS), and the SF-12 (12-item shortform) was also performed. Any differences arising between the investigators were resolved by discussion. Seventeen studies were relevant to the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. A higher rate of patients who reached MCID in the mHHS (<i>P</i>=0.02) as well as a higher rate of revision arthroscopy was observed for labral repair (<i>P</i>=0.03). The remaining studied outcomes were comparable. Despite the greater predictability of success in the reconstruction group, conduct of additional studies will be required for evaluation of the benefits of such findings. In addition, labral reconstruction is more technically demanding than a labral repair.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73239,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hip & pelvis\",\"volume\":\"36 3\",\"pages\":\"168-178\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11380542/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hip & pelvis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5371/hp.2024.36.3.168\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hip & pelvis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5371/hp.2024.36.3.168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本荟萃分析旨在比较唇瓣修复术与唇瓣重建术的术后效果和并发症。从 1986 年到 2023 年 8 月,我们使用以下数据库进行了电子检索:PubMed、Cochrane 和 Google Scholar(第 1-20 页)。研究的主要目标包括术后临床疗效,根据视觉模拟量表(VAS)、改良哈里斯髋关节评分(mHHS)、髋关节结果评分-运动分量表(HOS-SS)、髋关节结果评分-日常生活活动(HOS-ADL)和国际髋关节结果工具-12(iHOT-12)达到最小临床重要差异(MCID)的患者人数确定。此外,还分析了关节镜翻修率、转为全髋关节置换术(THA)率、术后 VAS、mHHS、HOS-SS、HOS-ADL、iHOT-12、非关节炎性髋关节评分(NAHS)、患者满意度、下肢功能量表(LEFS)和 SF-12(12 项简表)。研究者之间出现的任何分歧均通过讨论解决。有 17 项研究符合纳入标准,并被纳入本次荟萃分析。观察发现,在 mHHS 中达到 MCID 的患者比例较高(P=0.02),且唇囊修复术的关节镜翻修率较高(P=0.03)。其余研究结果具有可比性。尽管重建组成功的可预测性更高,但还需要进行更多的研究来评估这些发现的益处。此外,与唇修补术相比,唇重建术的技术要求更高。
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
Hip Labral Repair versus Reconstruction: Meta-analysis.

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the postoperative outcomes and complications of labral repair with those of labral reconstruction. An electronic search strategy was conducted from 1986 until August 2023 using the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20). The primary objectives included the postoperative clinical outcomes determined by the number of patients who reached minimal clinical important difference (MCID) on the visual analog scale (VAS), modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Life (HOS-ADL), and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12). In addition, analysis of the rate of revision arthroscopy, the rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), the postoperative VAS, mHHS, HOS-SS, HOS-ADL, iHOT-12, nonarthritic hip score (NAHS), patient satisfaction, lower extremity function scale (LEFS), and the SF-12 (12-item shortform) was also performed. Any differences arising between the investigators were resolved by discussion. Seventeen studies were relevant to the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. A higher rate of patients who reached MCID in the mHHS (P=0.02) as well as a higher rate of revision arthroscopy was observed for labral repair (P=0.03). The remaining studied outcomes were comparable. Despite the greater predictability of success in the reconstruction group, conduct of additional studies will be required for evaluation of the benefits of such findings. In addition, labral reconstruction is more technically demanding than a labral repair.

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
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cement Filling Technique to Prevent Greater Trochanter Displacement in Hip Arthroplasty for Femoral Intertrochanteric Fracture: A Technical Note. Change of Sacral Slope according to the Surgical Position in Total Hip Arthroplasty. Complications and Healthcare Cost of Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients with Depressive Disorder. Direct Anterior Approach in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Single Center Experience. Evidence-based Approach for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection.
×
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