Background: Autograft choice in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains controversial, with increasing interest in the usage of quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft versus traditional hamstring tendon (HT) use. The current study undertakes an in-depth review and comparison of the clinical and functional outcomes of QT and HT autografts in ACLR. Hypothesis: The QT autograft is equivalent to the HT autograft and there will be little or no significant difference in the outcomes between these 2 autografts. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: The PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL databases were systematically searched from their inception until November 2020. All observational studies comparing ACLR QT and HT autografts were assessed for their methodological quality. Patient outcomes were compared according to patient-reported outcome measures (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Cincinnati, Lysholm, Tegner, and visual analog scale [VAS] measures), knee extensor and flexor torque limb symmetry indices (LSIs), hamstring to quadriceps (H/Q) ratios, functional hop capacity, knee laxity, ipsilateral graft failure, and contralateral injury. Results: A total of 20 observational studies comprising 28,621 patients (QT = 2550; HT = 26,071) were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. In comparison with patients who received an HT autograft, those who received a QT autograft had similar postoperative Lysholm (mean difference [MD], 0.67; P = .630), IKDC (MD, 0.48; P = .480), VAS pain (MD, 0.04; P = .710), and Cincinnati (MD, -0.85; P = .660) scores; LSI for knee flexor strength (MD, 6.06; P = .120); H/Q ratio (MD, 3.22; P = .160); hop test LSI (MD, -1.62; P = .230); pivot-shift test grade 0 (odds ratio [OR], 0.80; P = .180); Lachman test grade 0 (OR, 2.38; P = .320), side-to-side laxity (MD, 0.09; P = .650); incidence of graft failure (OR, 1.07; P = .830) or contralateral knee injury (OR, 1.22; P = .610); and Tegner scores (MD, 0.11; P = .060). HT autografts were associated with a higher (better) side-to-side LSI for knee extensor strength (MD, -6.31; P = .0002). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, the use of the QT autograft was equivalent to the HT autograft in ACLR, with comparable graft failure and clinical and functional outcomes observed. However, HT autografts were associated with better LSI knee extensor strength.
This study aimed to evaluate the additional utility of an automated method of estimating volume for stones being treated with shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) using computed tomography (CT) images compared to manual measurement. Utility was assessed as the ability to accurately measure stone burden before and after SWL treatment, and whether stone volume is a better predictor of SWL outcome than stone diameter. 72 patients treated with SWL for a renal stone with available CT scans before and after treatment were included. Stone axes measurement and volume estimation using ellipsoid equations were compared to volume estimation using software using CT textural analysis (CTTA) of stone images. There was strong correlation (r > 0.8) between manual and CTTA estimated stone volume. CTTA measured stone volume showed the highest predictive value (r2 = 0.217) for successful SWL outcome on binary logistic regression analysis. Three cases that were originally classified as ‘stone-free with clinically insignificant residual fragments’ based on manual axis measurements actually had a larger stone volume based on CTTA estimation than the smallest fragments remaining for cases with an outcome of ‘not stone-free’. This study suggests objective measurement of total stone volume could improve estimation of stone burden before and after treatment. Current definitions of stone-free status based on manual measurements of residual fragment sizes are not accurate and may underestimate remaining stone burden after treatment. Future studies reporting on the efficacy of different stone treatments should consider using objective stone volume measurements based on CT image analysis as an outcome measure of stone-free state.
Purpose: Perioperative blood loss remains a major challenge to surgeons in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) surgery, despite of the introduction of minimally invasive approach. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is believed to reduce blood loss, which may minimise the complication of postoperative haemarthrosis with insufficient evidence on its effectiveness in ACLR. The primary aim of this study was to examine the effect of TXA on postoperative blood loss and other secondary outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic ACLR surgery. Method: PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL database were systematically searched from its inception until November 2020. All randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing TXA (intravenous or intra-articular) versus placebo in the arthroscopic ACLR surgery were included. Case series, case report and editorials were excluded. Results: Five RCTs comprising of a total of 580 patients (291 in TXA group, 289 in control group) were included for qualitative and quantitative meta-analysis. In comparison to placebo, TXA group was significantly associated with lower postoperative blood loss (mean difference (MD): −81.93 ml; 95% CI −141.80 to −22.05) and lower incidence of needing knee aspiration (odd ratio (OR): 0.19; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.44). Patients who randomised to TXA were also reported to have better range of movement (MD: 2.86; 95% CI 0.54 to 5.18), lower VAS Pain Score (MD: −1.39; 95% CI −2.54 to −0.25) and higher Lysholm Score (MD: 7.38; 95% CI 2.75 to 12.01). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, TXA reduced postoperative blood loss with lesser incidence of needing knee aspiration along with better range of knee movement and Lysholm score in patients undergoing arthroscopic ACLR surgery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.