Clinical and Functional Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Cortical Button Fixation Versus Transfemoral Suspensory Fixation: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: To compare clinical and functional outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using cortical button versus transfemoral suspensory fixation. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted following the Cochrane handbook guidelines and PROSPERO registration. Only Level I and II randomized controlled trials comparing cortical button and transfemoral suspensory fixation in hamstring ACL reconstruction were included. A literature search was performed using electronic databases. The methodologic quality of included studies was assessed using The Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool. All outcomes reported by each study were evaluated. Primary outcome measures were postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm knee scores. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen). Dichotomous data were reported as risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed using I(2). RESULTS: Five studies involving 317 patients were included. The mean follow-up period was 21.7 ± 7.0 months (range, 12 to 38 months). The mean age of participants was 26.7 ± 1.89 years (range, 16 to 48 years). The Lysholm score, Tegner activity score, and IKDC score were compiled. Clinical assessment was performed by Lachman testing, assessment of side-to-side differences on KT-1000 (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA) testing, and measurements of thigh atrophy, as well as imaging (radiography and computed tomography) to assess for femoral tunnel widening. Pooled statistical analysis was possible only for postoperative IKDC and Lysholm scores. No significant differences were found between the cortical button and transfemoral fixation groups. Included studies did not report differences in clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. Radiographic results suggest increased femoral tunnel widening in the cortical button group. However, tunnel widening was not found to affect clinical results. CONCLUSIONS: The present evidence suggests that there are no short- to medium-term differences in knee-specific outcome measures between patients treated with cortical button femoral graft fixation and those treated with suspensory transfemoral fixation when undergoing ACL reconstruction. In addition, radiologic evidence of tunnel widening does not seem to affect short- to medium-term clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,025 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,024 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».