Endobutton带袢钢板与Rigidfix可吸收横穿钉内固定治疗前交叉韧带损伤有效性和安全性的Meta分析  

Clinical efficacy and safety of internal fixation with Endobutton plate versus absorbable Rigidfix cross-pins for treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries:a meta-analysis

作　　者：邱永琪 崔宏勋 岳松涛 水晓洋 王江一 王梁 郭马珑 QIU Yongqi;CUI Hongxun;YUE Songtao;SHUI Xiaoyang;WANG Jiangyi;WANG Liang;GUO Malong(Henan University of Chinese Medicine,Zhengzhou 450046,Henan,China;Luoyang Orthopedic-Traumatological Hospital,Zhengzhou 450016,Henan,China)

机构地区：[1]河南中医药大学,河南郑州450046 [2]河南省洛阳正骨医院/河南省骨科医院,河南郑州450016

出　　处：《中医正骨》2023年第1期36-42,共7页The Journal of Traditional Chinese Orthopedics and Traumatology

摘　　要：目的:系统评价Endobutton带袢钢板与Rigidfix可吸收横穿钉内固定治疗前交叉韧带损伤的有效性和安全性。方法:通过计算机检索中国知网、万方数据库、维普网、中国生物医学文献服务系统、PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane Library从数据库建库至2022年5月1日收录的比较Endobutton带袢钢板(Endobutton组)与Rigidfix可吸收横穿钉(Rigidfix组)内固定治疗前交叉韧带损伤的有效性和安全性的临床研究文献。由2名研究者独立依照纳入和排除标准对相关文献进行筛选和数据提取,并采用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具对纳入研究的随机对照试验文献进行质量评估,采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表对纳入的回顾性临床研究文献进行质量评估。采用RevMan5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:共检索到564篇文献,排除重复文献202篇,阅读题目和摘要后排除不相关文献248篇,阅读全文后排除97篇,最终纳入文献17篇,其中中文文献10篇、英文文献7篇。Meta分析结果显示,2组Lysholm膝关节评分、国际膝关节文献委员会(International Knee Documentation Committee, IKDC)评分、IKDC评分正常率、膝关节稳定性比较,组间差异均无统计学意义[Lysholm膝关节评分:MD=-0.05,95%CI(-0.43,0.33),P=0.800;IKDC评分:MD=0.25,95%CI(-1.08,1.58),P=0.710;IKDC评分正常率:RR=1.14,95%CI(0.94,1.38),P=0.170;膝关节稳定性:MD=-0.10,95%CI(-0.30,0.10),P=0.340],Endobutton组术后并发症发生率低于Rigidfix组[RR=0.54,95%CI(0.30,0.97),P=0.040]。基于术后Lysholm评分的发表偏倚风险分析结果显示,14项研究的分布不完全对称,不排除存在发表偏倚的可能。结论:Endobutton带袢钢板与Rigidfix可吸收横穿钉内固定治疗前交叉韧带损伤的疗效相当,但前者安全性高于后者。Objective:To systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of internal fixation with Endobutton plate versus absorb-able Rigidfix cross-pins in the treatment of anterior cruciate ligament(ACL)injuries.Methods:All clinical trial articles about the clinical efficacy and safety of internal fixation with Endobutton plate(Endobutton group)versus absorbable Rigidfix cross-pins(Rigidfix group)for treatment of ACL injuries included from database establishing to May 1,2022 were retrieved from the China National Knowledge Internet,Wanfang Database,Vip Database,Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System,PubMed,Embase,Web of Science and Cochrane Library through computer.The articles were screened and the information was extracted independently by two researchers according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,and if any disagreement was found between them,discussion was conducted or asked for another researcher for making a final decision.The methodological quality of researches in the randomized controlled trial(RCT)articles and retrospective clinical trial articles was evaluated by using Cochrane bias risk assessment tools and Newcastle-Ottawa scale(NOS)respectively,and then a Meta-analysis was conducted by using RevMan5.3 software.Results:Five hundred and sixty-four articles were searched out,and 202 repetitive articles were excluded in the initial stage.After screening through further reading titles and abstracts of the articles as well as the full texts of the remained articles in detail,248 and 97 articles were excluded respectively,17 articles were included in the final analysis,including 10 Chinese articles and 7 English articles.The results of Meta-analysis showed there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in Lysholm knee score,International Knee Documentation Committee(IKDC)score,normal rate of IKDC score and knee stability(Lysholm knee score:MD=-0.05,95%CI(-0.43,0.33),P=0.800;IKDC score:MD=0.25,95%CI(-1.08,1.58),P=0.710;normal rate of IKDC score:RR=1.14,95%CI(0.94,1.38),P=0.170;knee stab

关 键 词：前交叉韧带损伤 ENDOBUTTON RIGIDFIX 专题Meta分析 

分 类 号：R687.4[医药卫生—骨科学]