Abstract
To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) among patients who underwent either isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction or combined lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) or anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR). RCTs that compared isolated ACL reconstruction and combined LET or ALLR were included with minimum 12 months follow-up. Studies that used the double-bundle technique were excluded. Outcome assessment included the number of positive pivot shifts, amount of anterior tibial translation, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective, Tegner, and Lysholm scores. Bayesian NMA and the surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) were evaluated. A total of 1,077 patients from 11 RCTs were enrolled in this study. In NMA, the odds ratios (ORs) of positive pivot shift were significantly lower in ACL+ ALLR (OR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.027-0.67) than isolated ACL reconstruction, but no difference between ACL+ ALLR and ACL+ LET. There were no significant differences in anterior tibial translation among the techniques, but the IKDC subjective and Lysholm scores of ACL+ ALLR and ACL+ LET were significantly higher thanisolated ACL reconstruction. ACL+ ALLR were the most preferred in terms of residual pivot shift, anterior tibial translation, and IKDC subjective scores (SUCRA= 88.2%, 86.4%, and 93.1%, respectively). Additional lateral procedures resulted in significantly lower risk of graft failure (OR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.1-0.71) than isolated ACL reconstruction. ACL+ ALLR were found to have significantly better outcomes in terms of knee rotational stability and graft failure rate than isolated ACL reconstructions, but the clinical outcomes were uncertain after a minimum 12 months follow-up. Considering the greatest probability of obtaining better knee rotational stability in this NMA, ACL+ ALLR was found to be the most preferred technique for patients with ACL injury. Level II, network meta-analysis and systematic review of Level I and II studies.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
More From: Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.