Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been introduced as a tool to increase the accuracy of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) compared with conventional instrumentation (CLI). However, previous studies have shown inconsistent results. The authors conducted a meta-analysis to compare the performance of PSI to CLI in TKA. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases were systematically searched to identify eligible trials published between 2000 and March 2014. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality according to the Cochrane Handbook. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the different study designs (randomized, controlled trial [RCT] vs non-randomized, controlled trial [non-RCT]), preoperative magnetic resonance imaging vs computed tomography, and systems of PSI to explore the source of heterogeneity. Fourteen studies (7 RCTs and 7 non-RCTs) involving 1906 patients were included. There were no statistical differences with respect to the outliers of mechanical axis, coronal femoral component, sagittal femoral component, femoral component rotation, operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay between PSI and CLI groups. The number of outliers in coronal tibial components (odds ratio, 2.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.20 to 4.35; P=.01) and sagittal tibial components (odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 2.42; P<.01) was significantly lower in the CLI group than in the PSI group. Based on the numbers available, the use of PSI compared with CLI was not likely to improve the accuracy of component alignment and treatment effects of TKA. Further high-quality RCTs are warranted to confirm the authors' results.
Rotator cuff tears have a high recurrence rate, even after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Although some biomechanical evidence suggests the superiority of the double-row vs the single-row technique, clinical findings regarding these methods have been controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the double-row repair method results in a lower incidence of recurrent tearing compared with the single-row method. Electronic databases were systematically searched to identify reports of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) comparing single-row with double-row rotator cuff repair. The primary outcome assessed was retear of the repaired cuff. Secondary outcome measures were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, the Constant shoulder score, and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score. Heterogeneity between the included studies was assessed. Six studies involving 428 patients were included in the review. Compared with single-row repair, double-row repair demonstrated a lower retear incidence (risk ratio [RR]=1.71 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.18-2.49]; P=.005; I(2)=0%) and a reduced incidence of partial-thickness retears (RR=2.16 [95% CI, 1.26-3.71]; P=.005; I(2)=26%). Functional ASES, Constant, and UCLA scores showed no difference between single- and double-row cuff repairs. Use of the double-row technique decreased the incidence of retears, especially partial-thickness retears, compared with the single-row technique. The functional outcome was not significantly different between the 2 techniques. To improve the structural outcome of the repaired rotator cuff, surgeons should use the double-row technique. However, further long-term RCTs on this topic are needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.