Surgical repair of grade 3 lateral ligament ankle ruptures reduces re-injury .
Este estudio ha sido identificado como potencialmente de alto impacto.
La métrica de alto impacto de OE, impulsada por la IA, estima la influencia que probablemente tendrá un artículo integrando señales tanto de la revista en la que se publica como del contenido científico del propio artículo.
Desarrollado mediante el procesamiento del lenguaje natural más avanzado, el modelo de Alto Impacto de OE predice con mayor precisión el futuro rendimiento de las citas de un estudio que el factor de impacto de la revista por sí solo.
Esto permite reconocer antes las investigaciones clínicamente significativas y ayuda a los lectores a centrarse en los artículos con más probabilidades de configurar la práctica futura.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(2):77 J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010 Oct 20;92(14):2367-74. Epub 2010 Sep 10.51 physically active Finnish men with the acute rupture of the lateral ligament of the ankle were randomized to be treated with either the surgical repair and accelerated functional treatment or with traditional functional treatment using Aircast ankle brace. The long-term results of surgical treatment of acute lateral ligament rupture of the ankle corresponded well with functional treatment modalities alone; however, the surgical treatment had a lower re-rupture incidence, but was associated with higher rates of osteoarthritis of the ankle joint.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Sí = 1
Incierto = 0,5
No relevante = 0
No = 0
La evaluación de los criterios de información evalúa la transparencia con la que los autores informan de las características metodológicas y del ensayo dentro de la publicación. La evaluación se divide en cinco categorías que se presentan a continuación.
3/4
Randomization
3/4
Outcome Measurements
4/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
4/4
Therapy Description
1/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
El Índice de Fragilidad es una herramienta que ayuda en la interpretación de hallazgos significativos, proporcionando una medida de fuerza para un resultado. El Índice de Fragilidad representa el número de eventos consecutivos que es necesario añadir a un resultado dicotómico para que el hallazgo deje de ser significativo. Un número pequeño representa un hallazgo más débil y un número grande un hallazgo más fuerte.
¿Por qué se necesitaba ahora este estudio?
Lateral ligament ankle injuries are very common with over 300,000 cases reporting annually to emergency rooms in UK alone. The treatment of acute ruptures of the lateral ligaments is a controversial issue with insufficient evidence to compare surgical and non-surgical modalities. Previous studies have shown notable design flaws, such as short follow-ups, faulty randomizations, and heterogeneous study samples. This study evaluated the long term outcomes of the surgical vs non-surgical approaches.
¿Cuál era la pregunta principal de la investigación?
Does the surgery provide better long-term outcomes than a purely functional rehabilitation for the grade 3 lateral ankle ruptures?
- The prevalence of reinjury was 1/15 in the surgical group and 7/18 in the functional treatment group (risk difference: 32%; 95% confidence interval: 6% to 58%).
- The mean ankle score on Performance Test Protocol and Scoring Scale for the Evaluation of Ankle Injuries was not significantly different between the groups (mean difference: 8.3 points; 95% confidence interval:-0.03 to 16.6 points)
- Stress radiographs showed no differences between groups, with regard to the mean anterior drawer (1 mm in the surgical group and 0 mm in the functional group; mean difference: 0.7 mm; 95% confidence interval:1.4 to 2.7 mm) or mean tilt angle (0 degrees in both groups; mean difference: 0.1 degrees; 95% confidence interval: 3.2 degrees to 3.5 degrees)
- Grade-II osteoarthritis was observed on magnetic resonance images of 4/15 surgically treated patients and 0/18 for the functionally treated patients (risk difference: 27%; 95% confidence interval: 4% to 49%)
- 10/15 patients in the surgical group and 7/18 in functional group subjectively reported complete recovery (risk difference: 28%; 95% confidence interval: -5% to 61%). All patients in both groups recovered to preinjury activity level (walk and run normally)
- The level of physical activity, range of motion compared to contralateral ankle, and number of patients visiting a physician at the time of follow-up did not differ between the two groups.
- 3/15 surgical patients had loss of sensation in the lateral aspect of ankle and foot. No re-operations due to ankle instability, infections, or incidences of venous thrombosis were seen in either group.
¿Qué es lo que más debo recordar?
The recovery to preinjury levels of acute lateral grade III ligament rupture of the ankle was equivalent when using either surgical or nonoperative methods. Re-injury was significantly less in surgical group; however, there was significantly more OA present.
¿Cómo afectará esto al cuidado de mis pacientes?
This study questions whether to subject patients to surgical risks given the evidence of equal pre-injury recovery, and suggests that non-surgical treatments can be equally beneficial. However, larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these findings.
DESCARGO DE RESPONSABILIDAD
El contenido de esta página tiene únicamente fines informativos y no pretende sustituir el consejo, diagnóstico o tratamiento médico profesional. Si necesita tratamiento médico, busque siempre el consejo de su médico o acuda al servicio de urgencias más cercano. Las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista expresados por las personas sobre el contenido que se encuentra en esta página no reflejan las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista de OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 artículos mensuales GRATIS desbloqueados
