Cargando…
The Statistical Fragility of Single-Bundle vs Double-Bundle Autografts for ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies
BACKGROUND: The statistical significance of a given study outcome can be liable to small changes in findings. P values are common, but imperfect statistical methods to convey significance, and inclusion of the fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) may provide a clearer perception of stati...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8721389/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34988239 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211064626 |
_version_ | 1784625330741313536 |
---|---|
author | Ehlers, Cooper B. Curley, Andrew J. Fackler, Nathan P. Minhas, Arjun Rodriguez, Ariel N. Pasko, Kory Chang, Edward S. |
author_facet | Ehlers, Cooper B. Curley, Andrew J. Fackler, Nathan P. Minhas, Arjun Rodriguez, Ariel N. Pasko, Kory Chang, Edward S. |
author_sort | Ehlers, Cooper B. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The statistical significance of a given study outcome can be liable to small changes in findings. P values are common, but imperfect statistical methods to convey significance, and inclusion of the fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) may provide a clearer perception of statistical strength. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to examine the statistical stability of studies comparing primary single-bundle to double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) utilizing autograft and independent tunnel drilling. It was hypothesized that the study findings would be vulnerable to a small number of outcome event reversals, often less than the number of patients lost to follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the authors searched PubMed for comparative studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in select journals, based on impact factor, between 2005 and 2020. Risk-of-bias assessment and methodology scoring were conducted for the included studies. A total of 48 dichotomous outcome measures were examined for possible event reversals. The FI for each outcome was determined by the number of event reversals necessary to alter significance. The FQ was calculated by dividing the FI by the respective sample size. RESULTS: Of the 1794 studies screened, 15 comparative studies were included for analysis; 13 studies were RCTs. Overall, the mean FI and FQ were 3.14 (IQR, 2-4) and 0.050 (IQR, 0.032-0.062), respectively. For 72.9% of outcomes, the FI was less than the number of patients lost to follow-up. CONCLUSION: Studies comparing single-bundle versus double-bundle ACLR may not be as statistically stable as previously thought. Comparative studies and RCTs are at substantial risk for statistical fragility, with few event reversals required to alter significance. The reversal of fewer than 4 outcome events in a treatment group can alter the statistical significance of a given result; this is commonly less than the number of patients lost to follow-up. Future comparative study analyses might consider including FI and FQ with P values in their statistical analysis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8721389 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87213892022-01-04 The Statistical Fragility of Single-Bundle vs Double-Bundle Autografts for ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies Ehlers, Cooper B. Curley, Andrew J. Fackler, Nathan P. Minhas, Arjun Rodriguez, Ariel N. Pasko, Kory Chang, Edward S. Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: The statistical significance of a given study outcome can be liable to small changes in findings. P values are common, but imperfect statistical methods to convey significance, and inclusion of the fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) may provide a clearer perception of statistical strength. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to examine the statistical stability of studies comparing primary single-bundle to double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) utilizing autograft and independent tunnel drilling. It was hypothesized that the study findings would be vulnerable to a small number of outcome event reversals, often less than the number of patients lost to follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the authors searched PubMed for comparative studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in select journals, based on impact factor, between 2005 and 2020. Risk-of-bias assessment and methodology scoring were conducted for the included studies. A total of 48 dichotomous outcome measures were examined for possible event reversals. The FI for each outcome was determined by the number of event reversals necessary to alter significance. The FQ was calculated by dividing the FI by the respective sample size. RESULTS: Of the 1794 studies screened, 15 comparative studies were included for analysis; 13 studies were RCTs. Overall, the mean FI and FQ were 3.14 (IQR, 2-4) and 0.050 (IQR, 0.032-0.062), respectively. For 72.9% of outcomes, the FI was less than the number of patients lost to follow-up. CONCLUSION: Studies comparing single-bundle versus double-bundle ACLR may not be as statistically stable as previously thought. Comparative studies and RCTs are at substantial risk for statistical fragility, with few event reversals required to alter significance. The reversal of fewer than 4 outcome events in a treatment group can alter the statistical significance of a given result; this is commonly less than the number of patients lost to follow-up. Future comparative study analyses might consider including FI and FQ with P values in their statistical analysis. SAGE Publications 2021-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8721389/ /pubmed/34988239 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211064626 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 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 Ehlers, Cooper B. Curley, Andrew J. Fackler, Nathan P. Minhas, Arjun Rodriguez, Ariel N. Pasko, Kory Chang, Edward S. The Statistical Fragility of Single-Bundle vs Double-Bundle Autografts for ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies |
title | The Statistical Fragility of Single-Bundle vs Double-Bundle Autografts for ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies |
title_full | The Statistical Fragility of Single-Bundle vs Double-Bundle Autografts for ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies |
title_fullStr | The Statistical Fragility of Single-Bundle vs Double-Bundle Autografts for ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies |
title_full_unstemmed | The Statistical Fragility of Single-Bundle vs Double-Bundle Autografts for ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies |
title_short | The Statistical Fragility of Single-Bundle vs Double-Bundle Autografts for ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies |
title_sort | statistical fragility of single-bundle vs double-bundle autografts for acl reconstruction: a systematic review of comparative studies |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8721389/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34988239 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211064626 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ehlerscooperb thestatisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT curleyandrewj thestatisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT facklernathanp thestatisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT minhasarjun thestatisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT rodriguezarieln thestatisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT paskokory thestatisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT changedwards thestatisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT ehlerscooperb statisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT curleyandrewj statisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT facklernathanp statisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT minhasarjun statisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT rodriguezarieln statisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT paskokory statisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies AT changedwards statisticalfragilityofsinglebundlevsdoublebundleautograftsforaclreconstructionasystematicreviewofcomparativestudies |