Surgical repair of grade 3 lateral ligament ankle ruptures reduces re-injury .
Questo studio è stato identificato come potenzialmente ad alto impatto.
La metrica High Impact di OE, guidata dall'AI, stima l'influenza che un articolo potrebbe avere integrando i segnali della rivista in cui è stato pubblicato e il contenuto scientifico dell'articolo stesso.
Sviluppato utilizzando un'elaborazione del linguaggio naturale all'avanguardia, il modello High Impact di OE prevede in modo più accurato la futura performance citazionale di uno studio rispetto al solo fattore di impatto della rivista.
Ciò consente di riconoscere prima le ricerche clinicamente significative e aiuta i lettori a concentrarsi sugli articoli che hanno maggiori probabilità di influenzare la pratica 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)?
Sì = 1
Incerto = 0,5
Non rilevante = 0
No = 0
La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.
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
L'Indice di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.
Perché questo studio era necessario ora?
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.
Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?
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.
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?
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.
Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?
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.
DISCLAIMER
Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.
0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
