| 1. |
- Öhlin, Axel, 1990, et al.
(författare)
-
The evolution of femoroacetabular impingement surgical management as a model for introducing new surgical techniques
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0942-2056 .- 1433-7347. ; 28, s. 1333-1340
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introducing new surgical techniques and concepts can be difficult. There are many hurdles to overcome initially, such as the learning curve, equipment and technique development, before a standard of care can be established. In the past, new surgical techniques have been developed, and even widely accepted, before any scientific evaluation has been made. At that stage, it may be too late properly to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments, as the objectiveness and/or randomisation process may be obstructed. Since the introduction of evidence-based medicine (EBM), there have been high standards of scientific rigour to prove the efficacy of treatments. Based on the nature of evidence-based acceptance, innovations cannot be subjected to this final process before their evolution process is complete and, as a result, there is a need for the staged scientific development of new surgical techniques that should be adopted. This paper presents a model for this kind of stepwise introduction based on the actual evolution of FAI syndrome surgery. By following a scientific algorithmic methodology, new surgical techniques and concepts can be introduced in a stepwise manner to ensure the evidence-based progression of knowledge. © 2019, European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA).
|
|
| 2. |
- Diermeier, T., et al.
(författare)
-
Treatment after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0942-2056 .- 1433-7347. ; 28, s. 2390-2402
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Treatment strategies for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines for the management of ACL injury is to a large extent based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance toward consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence on operative vs. non-operative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study is to report the consensus statements on operative vs. non-operative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. Sixty-six international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, were convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the Scientific Organizing Committee and Session Chairs for the three working groups. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements prior to the meeting and provided the initial agreement and comments on the statement via an online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Eighty percent agreement was defined a-priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative v. non-operative treatment of ACL injury reached the consensus during the Symposium. Nine statements achieved unanimous support, two reached strong consensus, one did not achieve consensus, and one was removed due to redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting, and pivoting sports, early anatomic ACL reconstruction is recommended due to the high risk of secondary meniscus and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight plane activities, non-operative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability, or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomic ACL reconstruction is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field will assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatments with patients after an ACL injury. Level of evidence V. © 2020, European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA).
|
|
| 3. |
- Svantesson, Eleonor, et al.
(författare)
-
Strength in numbers? The fragility index of studies from the Scandinavian knee ligament registries
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0942-2056 .- 1433-7347. ; 28, s. 339-352
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: The fragility index (FI) is a metric to evaluate the robustness of statistically significant results. It describes the number of patients who would need to change from a non-event to an event to change a result from significant to non-significant. This systematic survey aimed to evaluate the feasibility of applying the FI to findings related to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in the Scandinavian knee ligament registries. Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and AMED databases were searched. Studies from the Scandinavian knee ligament registers were eligible if they reported a statistically significant result (p < 0.05) for any of the following dichotomous outcomes; ACL revision, contralateral ACL reconstruction or the presence of postoperative knee laxity. Only studies with a two-arm comparative analysis were included. Eligibility assessment, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. The dichotomous analyses were stratified according to the grouping variable for the two comparative arms as follows; age, patient sex, activity at injury, graft choice, drilling technique, graft fixation, single- versus double-bundle, concomitant cartilage injury and country. The two-sided Fisher’s exact test was used to calculate the FI of all statistically significant analyses. Results: From 158 identified studies, 13 studies were included. They reported statistical significance for a total of 56 dichotomous analyses, of which all but two had been determined by a time-to-event analysis. The median sample size for the arms was 5540 (range 92–38,666). The mean FI for all 56 dichotomous analyses was 80.6 (median 34.5), which means that a mean of 80.6 patients were needed to change outcome status to generate a non-significant result instead of a significant one. Seventeen analyses (30.4%) immediately became non-significant when performing the two-sided Fisher’s exact test and, therefore, had an FI of 0. The analyses related to age were the most robust, with a mean FI of 178.5 (median 116, range 1–1089). The mean FI of the other grouping variables ranged from 0.5 to 48.0. Conclusion: There was large variability in the FI in analyses from the Scandinavian knee ligament registries and almost one third of the analyses had an FI of zero. The FI is a rough measurement of robustness when applied to registry studies, however, future studies are needed to determine the most appropriate metric for robustness in registry studies. The use of the FI can provide clinicians with a deeper understanding of significant study results and promotes an evidence-based approach in the clinical care of patients. Level of evidence: Systematic review of prospective cohort studies, Level II. © 2019, The Author(s).
|
|
