Suture vs arrow repair: No clear advantage of either technique for knee meniscus tears .
This report has been verified
by one or more authors of the
original publication.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(4):58 J Knee Surg. 2012 Nov;25(5):397-402. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1313752. Epub 2012 May 15Exclusive Author Interview
This systematic review included 4 studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 2 comparative observational studies) that compared arrow repair and suture repair for patients with symptomatic meniscus tears of the knee. Results indicated that there was no difference between the two repair techniques for the mean retear and healing rate, knee rating scores, and time to re-operation. However, the quality of evidence included in this review was not optimal and firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of arrow repair compared to suture repair can not be made.
Were the search methods used to find evidence (original research) on the primary question or questions stated?
Was the search for evidence reasonably comprehensive?
Were the criteria used for deciding which studies to include in the overview reported?
Was the bias in the selection of studies avoided?
Were the criteria used for assessing the validity of the included studies reported?
Was the validity of all of the studies referred to in the text assessed with use of appropriate criteria (either in selecting the studies for inclusion or in analyzing the studies that were cited)?
Were the methods used to combine the findings of the relevant studies (to reach a conclusion) reported?
Were the findings of the relevant studies combined appropriately relative to the primary question that the overview addresses?
Were the conclusions made by the author or authors supported by the data and or analysis reported in the overview?
How would you rate the scientific quality of this evidence?
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.
4/4
Introduction
3/4
Accessing Data
3/4
Analysing Data
1/4
Results
2/4
Discussion
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?
If possible, it is crucial for a patient with a tear in the meniscus to receive repair, as removal of the meniscus is associated with the onset of detrimental changes, such as knee osteoarthritis. Suture repair, a technique in which the edges of the torn meniscus are sutured, has been considered the gold standard repair method for meniscus tears for some time. However, some surgeons now employ the newer arrow repair technique instead of suture repair, and it is currently uncertain as to which technique is most effective with regards to clinical outcomes. This systematic review, therefore, aimed to gather data from various trials in order to determine which meniscal repair technique is superior in patients with meniscus tears.
¿Cuál era la pregunta principal de la investigación?
Is arrow repair more effective than suture repair with regards to the rate of retear and healing in patients with meniscus tears of the knee?
- 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) indicated that there was no difference between the two techniques for the rate of failure (p=0.92)
- According to another RCT, the two techniques did not differ with respect to the healing rate (p=0.11); at repeat arthroscopy, full or partial healing of the menisci was seen in 30 patients in the arrow group and 24 patients in the suture group
- Based on the Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Rating System used in one observational study, satisfactory results (excellent or good results) were found in 17 patients of the suture group and 22 patients of the arrow group (the study indicated that there was no clinical difference between the two groups)
- According to the second observational study, there was no difference between the two groups for the mean time to re-operation (p=0.85)
¿Qué es lo que más debo recordar?
There was no difference between the arrow and suture repair techniques with respect to healing and re-tear rates, knee rating scores, and mean time to re-operation.
¿Cómo afectará esto al cuidado de mis pacientes?
Firm conclusions regarding the optimal treatment for patients with meniscus tears of the knee can not be made due to the low quality of the studies used in this review. Further research with fewer methodological flaws and larger sample sizes are needed to compare arrow and suture repair in order to form definitive conclusions.
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
