Cargando…

Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Open and fluoroscopic techniques have been described for localization of the femoral attachment site in medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. No study to date has evaluated if one technique is superior to another in terms of complications. PURPOSE: To review the literatur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Heindel, Koan, Smoak, Jason, Kocan, Joseph, Cossell, Charles, Haider, Mohammad Nadir, Levy, Benjamin J., Bisson, Leslie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278418/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37342554
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221148482
_version_ 1785060482381512704
author Heindel, Koan
Smoak, Jason
Kocan, Joseph
Cossell, Charles
Haider, Mohammad Nadir
Levy, Benjamin J.
Bisson, Leslie
author_facet Heindel, Koan
Smoak, Jason
Kocan, Joseph
Cossell, Charles
Haider, Mohammad Nadir
Levy, Benjamin J.
Bisson, Leslie
author_sort Heindel, Koan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Open and fluoroscopic techniques have been described for localization of the femoral attachment site in medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. No study to date has evaluated if one technique is superior to another in terms of complications. PURPOSE: To review the literature comparing clinical outcomes of MPFL reconstruction using the fluoroscopic versus open technique to localize the site of femoral graft placement. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed via PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL to identify articles published between the inception of these databases and March 1, 2022, in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. This search yielded 4183 publications for initial review. Studies with at least a 2-year follow-up and complete reporting of patient-reported outcomes, range of motion, recurrent instability, and/or complications (ie, stiffness, infection, persistent pain) were included. We excluded studies of patients with collagen disorders; revision surgeries; surgeries with concomitant procedures; synthetic MPFL reconstruction; MPFL repairs; combined open and radiographic technique; and case series that included <10 patients. A proportional meta-analysis was performed by calculating the pooled estimate of incidence with 95% CIs using a fixed-effects model with double arcsine transformation (Freeman-Tukey) for each type of surgical technique (fluoroscopic or open). RESULTS: A total of 29 studies met our inclusion criteria, of which 15 studies (566 patients) used the open technique and 14 studies (620 patients) used fluoroscopy. There were no significant differences between the open and fluoroscopic techniques in the incidence of postoperative apprehension (P = .4826), postoperative subjective instability (P = .1095), postoperative objective instability (P = .5583), reoperations (P = .7981), recurrent dislocation (P = .6690), or arthrofibrosis (P = .8118). CONCLUSION: Both open and radiographic localization of the femoral graft position in MPFL reconstruction offer similar outcomes and rates of complications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10278418
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102784182023-06-20 Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Heindel, Koan Smoak, Jason Kocan, Joseph Cossell, Charles Haider, Mohammad Nadir Levy, Benjamin J. Bisson, Leslie Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Open and fluoroscopic techniques have been described for localization of the femoral attachment site in medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. No study to date has evaluated if one technique is superior to another in terms of complications. PURPOSE: To review the literature comparing clinical outcomes of MPFL reconstruction using the fluoroscopic versus open technique to localize the site of femoral graft placement. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed via PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL to identify articles published between the inception of these databases and March 1, 2022, in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. This search yielded 4183 publications for initial review. Studies with at least a 2-year follow-up and complete reporting of patient-reported outcomes, range of motion, recurrent instability, and/or complications (ie, stiffness, infection, persistent pain) were included. We excluded studies of patients with collagen disorders; revision surgeries; surgeries with concomitant procedures; synthetic MPFL reconstruction; MPFL repairs; combined open and radiographic technique; and case series that included <10 patients. A proportional meta-analysis was performed by calculating the pooled estimate of incidence with 95% CIs using a fixed-effects model with double arcsine transformation (Freeman-Tukey) for each type of surgical technique (fluoroscopic or open). RESULTS: A total of 29 studies met our inclusion criteria, of which 15 studies (566 patients) used the open technique and 14 studies (620 patients) used fluoroscopy. There were no significant differences between the open and fluoroscopic techniques in the incidence of postoperative apprehension (P = .4826), postoperative subjective instability (P = .1095), postoperative objective instability (P = .5583), reoperations (P = .7981), recurrent dislocation (P = .6690), or arthrofibrosis (P = .8118). CONCLUSION: Both open and radiographic localization of the femoral graft position in MPFL reconstruction offer similar outcomes and rates of complications. SAGE Publications 2023-06-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10278418/ /pubmed/37342554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221148482 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Heindel, Koan
Smoak, Jason
Kocan, Joseph
Cossell, Charles
Haider, Mohammad Nadir
Levy, Benjamin J.
Bisson, Leslie
Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_full Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_fullStr Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_short Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_sort stiffness and instability after mpfl reconstruction using a fluoroscopic versus open technique to localize the femoral attachment site: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278418/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37342554
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221148482
work_keys_str_mv AT heindelkoan stiffnessandinstabilityaftermpflreconstructionusingafluoroscopicversusopentechniquetolocalizethefemoralattachmentsiteasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT smoakjason stiffnessandinstabilityaftermpflreconstructionusingafluoroscopicversusopentechniquetolocalizethefemoralattachmentsiteasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT kocanjoseph stiffnessandinstabilityaftermpflreconstructionusingafluoroscopicversusopentechniquetolocalizethefemoralattachmentsiteasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT cossellcharles stiffnessandinstabilityaftermpflreconstructionusingafluoroscopicversusopentechniquetolocalizethefemoralattachmentsiteasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT haidermohammadnadir stiffnessandinstabilityaftermpflreconstructionusingafluoroscopicversusopentechniquetolocalizethefemoralattachmentsiteasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT levybenjaminj stiffnessandinstabilityaftermpflreconstructionusingafluoroscopicversusopentechniquetolocalizethefemoralattachmentsiteasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT bissonleslie stiffnessandinstabilityaftermpflreconstructionusingafluoroscopicversusopentechniquetolocalizethefemoralattachmentsiteasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis