ACE Report Cover
TKA: Mini-midvastus approach yields better short-term outcomes vs. parapatellar approach
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
言語
Download Download Download
ダウンロード
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
引用
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ お気に入り
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
言語
Download Download Download
ダウンロード
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
引用
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ お気に入り

ARTHROPLASTY

Minimally Invasive Midvastus versus Standard Parapatellar Approach in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2014;2(14):6 PLoS One. 2014 May 20;9(5):e95311. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095311. eCollection 2014.

18 randomized controlled trials (937 patients; 1093 TKAs) comparing the mini-midvastus and parapatellar approaches in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were included in this meta-analysis. The purpose of this review was to compare these two treatment approaches with respect to postoperative pain, function and complications. Pooled data indicated that, although associated with a significantly longer operative time, the mini-midvastus approach yielded significantly better pain scores and range of motion at 1-2 weeks post-operation, compared to the parapatellar approach. Furthermore, both groups exhibited similar Knee Society Scores, rates of lateral retinacular release, blood loss, straight leg raise, hospital stay and postoperative complications.


出版資金提供の詳細 +
資金提供:
Non-funded
コンフリクト:
None disclosed

バイアスのリスク

10/10

報告基準

18/20

脆弱性指数

N/A

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?

はい = 1

不確実=0.5

無関係 = 0

いいえ = 0

報告基準評価では、著者が出版物内で試験の方法論的特徴や試験特性を報告する際の透明性を評価します。評価は以下の5つのカテゴリーに分類されます。

4/4

Introduction

4/4

Accessing Data

4/4

Analysing Data

3/4

Results

3/4

Discussion

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

Fragility Indexは、重要な所見の解釈を助けるツールで、結果の強さの尺度を提供します。Fragility Indexは、その所見が有意でなくなるために、二項対立の結果に追加する必要がある連続した事象の数を表します。数値が小さいほど弱い所見を表し、数値が大きいほど強い所見を表します。

なぜ今この研究が必要なのですか?

In an attempt to minimize pain and promote recovery in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) minimally-invasive techniques have been adopted for this type of surgical procedure. Traditionally, minimally-invasive TKA (MIS TKA) has been performed using either a subvastus or quadriceps-sparing approach; however, these techniques involve small surgical fields and longer operative times. As a result, the mini-midvastus approach was proposed to address some of these concerns. As several high-quality trials have compared these techniques to date, this meta-analysis was needed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of mini-midvastus and standard parapatellar approach in patients undergoing TKA.

主な研究課題は何ですか?

With respect to clinical efficacy and safety, how does the mini-midvastus approach compare to the parapatellar approach in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty?

研究の特徴 +
データソース:
PubMed (1950-Oct 2013), EMBASE (1974-Oct 2013), Cochrane Library (issue 9, 2013), and Web of Science (1980-Oct 2013) were searched. A manual search of the reference lists of all relevant articles was also performed. Furthermore, Google Scholar was also searched.
索引用語:
The following search strategies were used for this meta-analysis: (1) Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee [Mesh] OR knee arthroplasty OR knee replacement; (2) parapatellar OR standard OR conventional; (3) midvastus OR mini-midvastus OR vastus splitting; and (4) #1 AND #2 AND #3.
研究の選択:
Study selection was performed independently by two reviewers. Studies were included if they: (1) were randomized controlled trials; (2) included adult patients undergoing primary TKA; and (3) compared the mini-midvastus approach to the standard parapatellar approach.
データ抽出:
Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers, with disagreements being resolved through discussion. The primary outcomes were Knee Society Scores (KSS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for pain. Secondary outcomes included knee range of motion (ROM), operative time, lateral retinacular release, blood loss, straight leg raise, hospital stay, and postoperative complications (i.e. total complications, deep vein thrombosis, and wound infection).
データ統合:
Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.2 software. For continuous and dichotomous outcomes, mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR) were calculated, respectively, along with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed by performing the X-squared test and by computing the I-squared statistic. When heterogeneity was significant (i.e. I-squared>50%), a random-effects model was used to pool the data. Conversely, when heterogeneity was not significant (i.e. I-squared 50% or less), a fixed-effects model was used.

重要な知見は?

  • 18 randomized controlled trials (937 patients; 1093 TKAs) were included in this meta-analysis.
  • With respect to Knee Society Scores (KSS), there were no significant between-group differences at 6 weeks (MD 5.15 [95% CI -3.36 to 13.66]; p=0.24), 3 months (MD 0.55 [-1.14 to 2.50]; p=0.59), 6 months (MD -2.15 [-5.92 to 1.62]; p=0.26), or 1 year (MD 0.66 [-0.68 to 1.99]; p=0.33) post-operation.
  • VAS scores were found to be significantly lower in the mini-midvastus group versus the parapatellar group at 1-2 weeks post-operation (MD -0.20 [95% CI -0.29 to 0.11]; p<0.01). There were no between-group differences at any other time point: 3 days (p=0.42), 6 weeks (p=0.22), 3 months (p=0.82) and 6 months (p=0.80) post-operation.
  • ROM was significantly higher using the mini-midvastus approach compared to the parapatellar approach at 1-2 weeks post-operation (MD 7.45 [95% CI 3.26 to 11.64]; p<0.05). There were no between-group differences at any other time point: 6 weeks (p=0.36), 3 months (p=0.46) and 6 months (p=0.47).
  • The mini-midvastus approach was associated with a significantly longer operative time compared to the parapatellar approach (MD 11.64 [95% CI 5.50 to 17.78]; p<0.05).
  • There was no significant difference between groups in lateral retinacular release (p=0.12), blood loss (p=0.33), straight leg raise (p=0.13), hospital stay (p=0.79), total complications (p=0.88), wound infection (p=0.64) or deep vein thrombosis (p=0.22).
最も覚えておくべきことは?

Although associated with a significantly longer operative time, the mini-midvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty (MIS TKA) yielded significantly better pain scores and range of motion in the short-term (i.e. 1-2 weeks post-operation), compared to the parapatellar approach. These outcomes were statistically similar between groups at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months post-operation. Furthermore, both groups exhibited similar Knee Society Scores, rates of lateral retinacular release, blood loss, straight leg raise, hospital stay and postoperative complications.

それが私の患者ケアにどのように影響するか?

The results from this study suggest that, despite longer operative times, the mini-midvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is associated with superior range of motion and pain scores in the short-term (i.e. 1-2 weeks postoperatively), when compared to the parapatellar approach. As heterogeneity among studies was significant for some analyses, additional research is required to confirm these results.

免責事項

このページに記載されている内容は、情報提供のみを目的としたものであり、専門的な医療アドバイス、診断、治療の代わりとなるものではありません。治療が必要な場合は、必ず医師の診断を仰ぐか、最寄りの救急外来を受診してください。このページに記載されている内容に関して個人が表明した意見、信念、見解は、OrthoEvidenceの意見、信念、見解を反映するものではありません。

0の4 月間無料記事のロック解除
今月の無料記事閲覧数が4件に達しました。

週1.99ドルからOrthoEvidenceにアクセスできます。

最新のエビデンスにアクセスしてください。いつでもキャンセルできます。
  • 整形外科における最新のインパクトのあるランダム化比較試験とシステマティックレビューの批判的評価
  • Journal of Bone and Joint Surgeryとのコラボレーション、国際的に著名な外科医へのインタビュー、整形外科ニュースやトピックに関する座談会など、OrthoEvidenceポッドキャストコンテンツへのアクセス
  • 週2回発行されるエビデンスに基づくニュースレター、The Pulseの購読。
Upgrade
Close Dialog
おかえりなさい
パスワードをお忘れですか?
今すぐ無料トライアルを開始

あなたのアカウントは
OrthoEvidenceへの無料アクセスが含まれます。


または
パスワードをお忘れですか?

または
Eメールをご確認ください

入力されたメールアドレスにアカウントが存在する場合、パスワードリセットのメールが送信されます。メールが届かない場合は、迷惑メールフォルダをご確認ください。

その他のサポート サポートチームまでご連絡ください。.

この機能を有効にするにはログインしてください

この機能にアクセスするには、有効なOrthoEvidenceアカウントにログインする必要があります。ログインするか、無料トライアルアカウントを作成してください。

ACEレポートを翻訳

OrthoEvidenceは、多言語でコンテンツにアクセスできるようにするため、第三者の翻訳サービスを利用しています。正確性を確保するためにあらゆる努力をしていますが、翻訳が必ずしも完璧ではない可能性があることにご注意ください。

引用方法 ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. TKA: Mini-midvastus approach yields better short-term outcomes vs. parapatellar approach. OE Journal. 2014;2(14):6. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/tka-mini-midvastus-approach-yields-better-short-term-outcomes-vs-parapatellar-approach

引用のコピー
この機能を有効にするにはログインしてください

この機能にアクセスするには、有効なOrthoEvidenceアカウントにログインする必要があります。ログインするか、無料トライアルアカウントを作成してください。

プレミアム会員機能

この機能にアクセスするには、OrthoEvidenceのプレミアムアカウントにログインする必要があります。

共有 ACE Report