Clinical outcomes in dynamic intraligamentary stabilization technique for anterior cruciate ligament tear: A meta-analysis

To compare the clinical outcome between dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in ACL tears. METHODS: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched to identify published articles on clinical studies comparing DIS versus ACL reconstruction. The results of the eligible studies were analyzed in terms of anteroposterior knee laxity translation (ΔATT) between the injured and contralateral knees, and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm score, Tegner score, and ipsilateral ACL failure, implant removal, and ACL revision. RESULTS: Five clinical studies including 429 patients with ACL tears met the inclusion criteria. DIS showed statistically comparable outcomes of ΔATT (P = .12), IKDC (P = .38), Tegner (P = .82), ACL failure (P = .50), ACL revision (P = .29) with ACL reconstruction. A significantly higher rate of implant removal (odds ratio for DIS vs ACL reconstruction, 7.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.72–22.00; P = .0001) but statistically higher Lysholm score (mean difference between DIS and ACL reconstruction, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.24–2.93; P = .02) were found in DIS group. CONCLUSION: Five clinical studies including 429 patients with ACL tears met the inclusion criteria. DIS showed statistically comparable outcomes of ΔATT (P = .12), IKDC (P = .38), Tegner (P = .82), ACL failure (P = .50), ACL revision (P = .29) with ACL reconstruction. A significantly higher rate of implant removal (odds ratio for DIS vs ACL reconstruction, 7.73; 95% CI, 2.72–22.00; P = .0001) but statistically higher Lysholm score (mean difference between DIS and ACL reconstruction, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.24–2.93; P = .02) were found in DIS group.