RESUMO
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common and debilitating knee injury that can significantly impair knee function and stability. The optimal management of ACL injuries remains a topic of ongoing debate, with two primary treatment approaches being surgical reconstruction and adequate rehabilitation. The aim of this study is to compare the knee function and stability outcomes between these two treatment modalities, shedding light on their respective effectiveness. We utilized Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane Database, MEDLINE, and Web of Science from inception until April 20, 2022. We utilized the Cochrane risk of bias tool for quality assessment. The following outcomes were assessed: Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee score, Lysholm score, the occurrence of the knee giving way, Tegner score, KT1000, Lachman test, pivot shift test, SF-36 score to assess the quality of life, and incidence of reinjury and reoperation. We included a total of six trials with a population sample size of 691 patients, which were divided into surgical versus non-surgical groups, accounting for 348 and 343 patients, respectively. The pooled estimate demonstrated that the surgical reconstruction was associated with a significant increase in the IKDC score (MD = 7.49 [2.04, 12.94], (P = 0.007)), and KOOS score was significant in the reconstruction cohort (MD = 5.87 [1.64, 10.09], (P = 0.007)). The incidences of reoperation (RR = 0.43 [0.20, 0.91], (P = 0.03)), reinjury (RR = 0.49 [0.27, 0.88], (P = 0.02)), and occurrence of the knee giving way (RR = 0.19 [0.08, 0.49], (P = 0.005)) were significantly decreased in the surgical cohort. There is no significant difference between both cohorts regarding the Lysholm score (1.27 [-1.39, 3.93], (P = 0.35)). The findings of this comprehensive analysis indicate that early reconstruction does not demonstrate clear superiority over rehabilitation alone in terms of knee function, Lysholm score, and Tegner score among patients with ACL rupture. However, early reconstruction does exhibit a substantial reduction in the incidence of reinjury, reoperation, and knee giving way, suggesting potential benefits in terms of stability outcomes. These results underscore the importance of considering individual patient characteristics and preferences in treatment decision-making.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify deficiencies in initiating anti-osteoporotic treatment following a fragility femoral fracture. METHODS: All patients ≥55 years of age treated for a fragility femoral fracture between June 2012 and May 2017 were enrolled. Medications at discharge and at 90 days and 1 year of follow up were analyzed. Patients were classified into 4 groups: Group I did not receive any treatment for osteoporosis; Group II received only calcium and vitamin D3; Group III received an anabolic agent, calcium, and vitamin D3; and Group IV received bisphosphonates, calcium, and vitamin D3. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients with an average age of 65.81±12.55 years were included. There were 88 (52.7%) males and 79 (47.3%) females. At discharge, 107 patients (64.1%) were not prescribed optimal treatment for osteoporosis, and this reduced to 55 (32.9%) at the 90-day follow up. At 1 year, the number of patients receiving suboptimal treatment was further reduced to 25.74%. CONCLUSIONS: Although the number of patients with fragility fractures receiving insufficient treatment was lower in the present study than in previous reports, increased efforts and coordinated treatment plans initiated by a fracture liaison service should be of high priority.
