Literature DB >> 23238925

Meta-analysis comparing bioabsorbable versus metal interference screw for adverse and clinical outcomes in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Pat Laupattarakasem1, Malinee Laopaiboon, Weerachai Kosuwon, Wiroon Laupattarakasem.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare bioabsorbable screw (BS) against metal screw (MS) primarily on adverse effects and secondarily on clinical outcomes after single-bundle primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
METHODS: Electronic searches were performed using search strategies meeting the mentioned purposes. Retrieved articles were selected for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting at least 1-year follow-up. Potential studies were selected under inclusion and exclusion criteria. Risk of biases and data extraction was completed by two review authors. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion. Mean difference and risk ratio with 95 % confidence interval (CI) were used for continuous and binary outcomes, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed using I (2). Pooled treatment effects with 95 % CI were estimated using the fixed- or random-effect model where appropriate.
RESULTS: Eleven RCTs with 878 randomly allocated patients were included, and 711 patients (81 %) with eligible follow-up time up to 8 years were analysed. Comparing with the MS group, BS group using medial hamstring graft showed evidence of larger tunnel widening on the femoral side measured from radiographs or magnetic resonance imaging, though data could not be pooled because diverse measurement methods had been used. Significantly higher rates of effusion and screw breakage, and fewer cases of complete tunnel healing were reported in the BS group. Nevertheless, functional and clinical results were not deteriorated by the presence of these adverse effects for both short- and longer-term follow-ups.
CONCLUSION: This is the first systematic review focusing on adverse effects of the BS, such as larger tunnel widening and higher rates of other complications. With these effects, routine use of the BS should be balanced with the advantages claimed. Cost-effectiveness is another issue, and well-designed RCTs are needed to better validate the implication.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23238925     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-012-2340-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  44 in total

1.  Biodegradable and metallic interference screws in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery using hamstring tendon grafts: prospective randomized study of radiographic results and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Gauti Laxdal; Jüri Kartus; Bengt I Eriksson; Eva Faxén; Ninni Sernert; Jon Karlsson
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2006-05-09       Impact factor: 6.202

2.  Ten-year magnetic resonance imaging follow-up of bioabsorbable poly-L-lactic acid interference screws after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  William H Warden; Dianna Chooljian; Douglas W Jackson
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2007-04-24       Impact factor: 4.772

3.  Revision cruciate ligament surgery with retention of femoral interference screws.

Authors:  M D Miller
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  1998 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 4.  Bioabsorbable versus metallic interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Chao Shen; Sheng-Dan Jiang; Lei-Sheng Jiang; Li-Yang Dai
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  A long-term, prospective, randomized study comparing biodegradable and metal interference screws in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: radiographic results and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Sven Stener; Lars Ejerhed; Ninni Sernert; Gauti Laxdal; Lars Rostgård-Christensen; Jüri Kartus
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-04-14       Impact factor: 6.202

6.  Preliminary results of an absorbable interference screw.

Authors:  F A Barber; B F Elrod; D A McGuire; L E Paulos
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 4.772

7.  A new bicortical tibial fixation technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with quadruple hamstring graft.

Authors:  J U Buelow; R Siebold; A Ellermann
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 8.  Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery.

Authors:  M H Getelman; M J Friedman
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  1999 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.020

9.  [Transplant fixation by anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Metal vs. bioabsorbable polyglyconate interference screw. A prospective randomized study of 40 patients].

Authors:  W Hackl; C Fink; K P Benedetto; C Hoser
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 10.  Adverse tissue reactions to bioabsorbable fixation devices.

Authors:  O M Böstman; H K Pihlajamäki
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  8 in total

1.  Resorbable screw and sheath versus resorbable interference screw and staples for ACL reconstruction: a comparison of two tibial fixation methods.

Authors:  Christian Carulli; Fabrizio Matassi; Stefano Soderi; Luigi Sirleo; Giovanni Munz; Massimo Innocenti
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Bioabsorbable versus metallic interference screws for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Pedro Debieux; Carlos E S Franciozi; Mário Lenza; Marcel Jun Tamaoki; Robert A Magnussen; Flávio Faloppa; João Carlos Belloti
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-07-24

3.  Long term results of bone-patella-tendon-bone ACL reconstruction.

Authors:  Max Ettinger; Friedel Etter; Tilman Calliess; Michael Bohnsack; Christoph Becher
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-11-01

Review 4.  Effective treatment options for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: A systematic overview of current evidence.

Authors:  Opeyemi O Babatunde; Joanne L Jordan; Danielle A Van der Windt; Jonathan C Hill; Nadine E Foster; Joanne Protheroe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Three-Dimensional Printed Porous Titanium Screw with Bioactive Surface Modification for Bone-Tendon Healing: A Rabbit Animal Model.

Authors:  Yu-Min Huang; Chih-Chieh Huang; Pei-I Tsai; Kuo-Yi Yang; Shin-I Huang; Hsin-Hsin Shen; Hong-Jen Lai; Shu-Wei Huang; San-Yuan Chen; Feng-Huei Lin; Chih-Yu Chen
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  Is all-inside with suspensory cortical button fixation a superior technique for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chun-Wei Fu; Wei-Cheng Chen; Yung-Chang Lu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  A Systematic Summary of Systematic Reviews on the Topic of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament.

Authors:  Michael J Anderson; William M Browning; Christopher E Urband; Melissa A Kluczynski; Leslie J Bisson
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2016-03-15

8.  Complications of Bioabsorbable Tibial Interference Screws After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Pediatric and Adolescent Athletes.

Authors:  Dennis E Kramer; Leslie A Kalish; Mininder S Kocher; Yi-Meng Yen; Lyle J Micheli; Benton E Heyworth
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2020-02-26
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.