Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis

被引:57
|
作者
Li, Xue [1 ]
Xu, Chang-peng [2 ]
Song, Jin-qi [1 ]
Jiang, Nan [1 ]
Yu, Bin [1 ]
机构
[1] So Med Univ, Nanfang Hosp, Dept Orthopaed & Traumatol, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[2] So Med Univ, Nanfang Hosp, Key Lab Bone & Cartilage Regenerat Med, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong, Peoples R China
关键词
ANATOMIC DOUBLE-BUNDLE; HAMSTRING TENDON GRAFTS; ACL RECONSTRUCTION; FOLLOW-UP; CLINICAL-EVALUATION; BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED-TRIAL; KNEE; LAXITY; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1007/s00264-012-1651-1
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the results of arthroscopic single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. We systematically searched electronic databases to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which arthroscopic single-bundle was compared with double-bundle for ACL reconstruction. The search strategy followed the requirements of the Cochrane Library Handbook. The outcomes of these studies were analysed in terms of graft failures, Lysholm score, negative pivot-shift test, KT1000 arthrometer measurements, knee extensor and flexor peak torques, knee extension and flexion deficit, and subjective and objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) final score. Methodological quality was assessed and data were extracted independently. Standard mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI) was calculated by a fixed effects or random effects model. Heterogeneity across the studies was assessed with the I-square and chi-square statistic. Forest plots were also generated. We identified 17 RCTs comprising 1,381 patients who were treated by arthroscopic single-bundle versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction. The results of meta-analysis of these studies showed that arthroscopic double-bundle reconstruction was associated with a lower risk of graft failures (P = 0.002) and a lower rate of positive pivot-shift test (P < 0.0001). Compared with single-bundle reconstruction, double-bundle reconstruction had a lower KT1000 arthrometer measurement (P < 0.00001), a lower knee extension deficit (P = 0.006) and a higher subjective IKDC score (P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference between single-bundle and double-bundle reconstruction in Lysholm score (P = 0.91), knee extensor peak torques (P = 0.97), knee flexor peak torques (P = 0.96), knee flexion deficit (P = 0.30) and objective IKDC score (P = 0.18). Considering the more favourable outcomes of graft failures, knee joint stability and knee joint function in double-bundle reconstruction, we concluded that arthroscopic double-bundle reconstruction should be considered as the primary treatment in ACL reconstruction.
引用
收藏
页码:213 / 226
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis
    Xue Li
    Chang-peng Xu
    Jin-qi Song
    Nan Jiang
    Bin Yu
    [J]. International Orthopaedics, 2013, 37 : 213 - 226
  • [2] Comment on Li et al.: Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis
    Weiqiang Dong
    Yi Chen
    Jianwen Fan
    Shujiang Zhang
    [J]. International Orthopaedics, 2013, 37 : 2099 - 2100
  • [3] Single-bundle or double-bundle for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis
    Li, Yu-Lin
    Ning, Guang-Zhi
    Wu, Qiang
    Wu, Qiu-Li
    Li, Yan
    Hao, Yan
    Feng, Shi-Qing
    [J]. KNEE, 2014, 21 (01): : 28 - 37
  • [4] Comment on Li et al.: Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis
    Dong, Weiqiang
    Chen, Yi
    Fan, Jianwen
    Zhang, Shujiang
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2013, 37 (10) : 2099 - 2100
  • [5] Outcome of single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament - A meta-analysis
    Meredick, Richard B.
    Vance, Kennan J.
    Appleby, David
    Lubowitz, James H.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2008, 36 (07): : 1414 - 1421
  • [6] Reply to comment on Gong et al.: Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis
    Li, Xue
    Xu, Chang-peng
    Song, Jin-qi
    Jiang, Nan
    Yu, Bin
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2013, 37 (11) : 2319 - 2320
  • [7] Reply to comment on Gong et al.: Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis
    Xue Li
    Chang-peng Xu
    Jin-qi Song
    Nan Jiang
    Bin Yu
    [J]. International Orthopaedics, 2013, 37 : 2319 - 2320
  • [8] Double-Bundle Versus Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
    Jarvela, Timo
    Jarvela, Sally
    [J]. CLINICS IN SPORTS MEDICINE, 2013, 32 (01) : 81 - +
  • [9] Biomechanical comparison of single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis
    Oh, Jin-Young
    Kim, Kun-Tae
    Park, Young-Jin
    Won, Hee-Chan
    Yoo, Jun-Il
    Moon, Dong-Kyu
    Cho, Sung-Hee
    Hwang, Sun-Chul
    [J]. KNEE SURGERY & RELATED RESEARCH, 2020, 32 (01)
  • [10] Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Kong, Lingde
    Liu, Zhao
    Meng, Fei
    Shen, Yong
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2017, 10 (01): : 1 - 15