Dataset Information

Knee arthroscopy versus conservative management in patients with degenerative knee disease: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine the effects and complications of arthroscopic surgery compared with conservative management strategies in patients with degenerative knee disease.

Design

Systematic review.

Main outcome measures

Pain, function, adverse events.

Data sources

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Google Scholar and Open Grey up to August 2016.

Eligibility criteria

For effects, randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing arthroscopic surgery with a conservative management strategy (including sham surgery) in patients with degenerative knee disease. For complications, RCTs and observational studies.

Review methods

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for patient-important outcomes. A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendations) provided input on the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including selection of patient-important outcomes. We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty (quality) of the evidence.

Results

We included 13 RCTs and 12 observational studies. With respect to pain, the review identified high-certainty evidence that knee arthroscopy results in a very small reduction in pain up to 3?months (mean difference =5.4 on a 100-point scale, 95% CI 2.0 to 8.8) and very small or no pain reduction up to 2?years (mean difference =3.1, 95% CI -0.2 to 6.4) when compared with conservative management. With respect to function, the review identified moderate-certainty evidence that knee arthroscopy results in a very small improvement in the short term (mean difference =4.9 on a 100-point scale, 95% CI 1.5 to 8.4) and very small or no improved function up to 2?years (mean difference =3.2, 95% CI -0.5 to 6.8). Alternative presentations of magnitude of effect, and associated sensitivity analyses, were consistent with the findings of the primary analysis. Low-quality evidence suggested a very low probability of serious complications after knee arthroscopy.

Conclusions

Over the long term, patients who undergo knee arthroscopy versus those who receive conservative management strategies do not have important benefits in pain or function.

Trial registration number

PROSPERO CRD42016046242.

SUBMITTER: Brignardello-Petersen R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5541494 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Knee arthroscopy versus conservative management in patients with degenerative knee disease: a systematic review.

Brignardello-Petersen Romina R Guyatt Gordon H GH Buchbinder Rachelle R Poolman Rudolf W RW Schandelmaier Stefan S Chang Yaping Y Sadeghirad Behnam B Evaniew Nathan N Vandvik Per O PO

BMJ open 20170511 5

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine the effects and complications of arthroscopic surgery compared with conservative management strategies in patients with degenerative knee disease.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Pain, function, adverse events.<h4>Data sources</h4>MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Google Scholar and Open Grey up to August 2016.<h4>Eligibility criteria</h4>For effects, randomised clinical trials (RCTs) compar ...[more]

PMID: 28495819

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Several studies have been published regarding the treatment of medial ulnar collateral ligament (MUCL) injuries for professional overhead athletes. However, there is a paucity of data regarding non-professional athletes. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the rate of outcome scores and complications of conservative versus operative treatments both in non-professional athletes and in non-sport-related trauma patients with MUCL lesions. METHODS:A systematic review of the published literature was performed by applying the PRISMA guidelines. A search was conducted using three databases: Medline, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The keywords used were "ulnar collateral ligament injury," "elbow," "surgery," and "conservative treatment". Patients were divided into three groups: patients who underwent conservative treatment (C-group), surgical treatment (S-group), and surgery after a failed conservative treatment (C&S-group). Clinical outcomes were analyzed: Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Conway scale, Carson score, and Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic score (KJOC). RESULTS:A total of 15 studies were included, evaluating 513 patients. Although good and excellent outcomes were found for most patients during daily and/or sport activities, independently of the type of treatment, the C-group had better results. Excellent results were found in 98.8% of the C-group, in 88.1% of the S-group, and in 87.7% of the C&S-group. The complication rate in the C-group was statistically higher compared to the S and C&S groups (P < 0.001). However, its complication rate was higher with lower patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS:There is insufficient evidence to establish statistically significant differences in the effects of conservative versus surgical treatments on the functional outcomes of patients with MUCL lesions. However, a period of rehabilitation therapy and the functional request of the single injured subject are useful to discern which patients genuinely require MUCL surgical repair.

Project description:Camptodactyly is a pediatric hand condition, the treatment of which remains controversial. The authors' aim was to improve patient care through clarifying the definition of camptodactyly and indications for surgical and/or conservative management, summarizing outcomes, and defining risks. A systematic review was conducted of articles in all languages on outcomes following surgical and/or conservative management of idiopathic camptodactyly in children using MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), PubMed, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) (until January 2017). The primary outcome was posttreatment flexion contracture, and the secondary outcomes were indications for surgery, complications, and patient satisfaction. Database searching generated 16 final articles, with 7 case series and 9 retrospective cohort studies. There was a lack of consistency on the definition of camptodactyly and in outcome reporting. All 16 studies received a "Weak" global rating and demonstrated low-quality evidence, suggesting that treatment of camptodactyly with operative or nonoperative measures reduces the degree of flexion contracture in most patients (from pretreatment averages of 20°-85° to posttreatment averages of 5°-37°). There was general agreement that surgery should be reserved for contracture >30° or failure to respond to conservative management. Surgery generally led to more complications compared with conservative management. Only one study reported on functional limitations, and another reported on patient-reported outcomes. Current evidence of the effectiveness of camptodactyly treatment in addressing both joint-specific deformity and patient-perceived function and appearance is insufficient to guide patient care. Future research may consider the development of decision aids to guide patients and families through selecting management strategies and to promote shared decision making.

Project description:PurposeTo consolidate the evidence from the available literature and undertake a meta-analysis to provide a reference for physicians to make evidence-based recommendations to their patients regarding the return to driving after hip or knee arthroscopic procedures.MethodsA systematic review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The OVID, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched through June 2020 for articles containing keywords and/or MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms "hip arthroscopy" and "knee arthroscopy" in conjunction with "total brake response time" or "reaction time" in the context of automobile driving. A title review and full article review were performed to assess quality and select relevant articles. A meta-analysis of qualifying articles was undertaken.ResultsEight studies met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis of brake reaction time (BRT). Meta-analysis of all knee BRTs showed times slower than or equal to baseline BRTs through 5 weeks, with a trend of improving BRTs from 6 to 10 weeks (weeks 8 and 10 were significant, P < .05). Among all hip BRTs, week 2 showed times slower than baseline BRTs, but after week 4, a trend toward faster BRTs was observed through week 8 (week 8 was significant, P < .05).ConclusionsBRTs met baseline or control values and continued to improve after 6 weeks after knee arthroscopy and after 4 weeks after hip arthroscopy. On the basis of these results, it would be safe to recommend a return to driving at 6 weeks after knee arthroscopic procedures and 4 weeks after hip arthroscopic procedures.Clinical relevanceThese results can be used by surgeons to base their recommendations on to provide guidance for their patients on the resumption of driving. Although BRT is an important aspect of driving ability, there are additional factors that need to be taken into consideration when making these recommendations, including cessation of opioid analgesics, strength of the surgical limb, and range of motion.

Dataset Information

Knee arthroscopy versus conservative management in patients with degenerative knee disease: a systematic review.

Objective

Design

Main outcome measures

Data sources

Eligibility criteria

Review methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Knee arthroscopy versus conservative management in patients with degenerative knee disease: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets