PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically compare the efficacy and safety of arthroscopic wafer procedure (AWP) versus ulnar shortening osteotomy (USO) for ulnar impaction syndrome (UIS) treatment.
METHODS: All the studies included in this meta-analysis compared the efficacy of AWP to USO for UIS and were acquired through a comprehensive search across multiple databases. The meta-analysis was performed by calculating the effect sizes with the Cochrane Collaboration\'s RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS: A total of 8 articles were included in this analysis, comprising 148 cases in the AWP group and 163 cases in the USO group. The pooled estimates indicated no significant differences in combined Darrow\'s Criteria or Modified Mayo Wrist Score, Modified Mayo Wrist Score, DASH scores, grip strength, VAS score, and postoperative ulnar variation. On the other hand, the patients in the AWP group exhibited fewer complications (OR = 0.17, 95%CI 0.05-0.54, P = 0.003) and a lower reoperation rate (OR = 0.12, 95%CI 0.05-0.28, P < 0.00001) than those in the USO group.
CONCLUSIONS: The two surgical techniques were both effective in treating UIS but the AWP group showed fewer complications and a lower reoperation rate. Therefore, AWP may present a superior alternative for UIS treatment.
METHODS: All the studies included in this meta-analysis compared the efficacy of AWP to USO for UIS and were acquired through a comprehensive search across multiple databases. The meta-analysis was performed by calculating the effect sizes with the Cochrane Collaboration\'s RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS: A total of 8 articles were included in this analysis, comprising 148 cases in the AWP group and 163 cases in the USO group. The pooled estimates indicated no significant differences in combined Darrow\'s Criteria or Modified Mayo Wrist Score, Modified Mayo Wrist Score, DASH scores, grip strength, VAS score, and postoperative ulnar variation. On the other hand, the patients in the AWP group exhibited fewer complications (OR = 0.17, 95%CI 0.05-0.54, P = 0.003) and a lower reoperation rate (OR = 0.12, 95%CI 0.05-0.28, P < 0.00001) than those in the USO group.
CONCLUSIONS: The two surgical techniques were both effective in treating UIS but the AWP group showed fewer complications and a lower reoperation rate. Therefore, AWP may present a superior alternative for UIS treatment.
摘要：
目的：本研究旨在系统比较关节镜下圆片手术（AWP）与尺骨短缩截骨术（USO）治疗尺骨嵌塞综合征（UIS）的疗效和安全性。
方法：本荟萃分析中包含的所有研究都比较了AWP与USO对UIS的疗效，并通过跨多个数据库的全面搜索获得。荟萃分析通过CochraneCollaboration的RevMan5.4软件计算效应大小进行。
结果：本次分析共纳入8篇文献，AWP组148例，USO组163例。汇总估计表明，综合达罗标准或改良的梅奥手腕评分没有显着差异，改良的梅奥手腕评分,DASH分数,握力,VAS评分,术后尺骨变异。另一方面,AWP组患者的并发症较少(OR=0.17,95CI0.05-0.54,P=0.003),再手术率较低(OR=0.12,95CI0.05-0.28,P<0.00001).
结论：两种手术技术均可有效治疗UIS，但AWP组的并发症较少，再次手术率较低。因此,AWP可能为UIS治疗提供了更好的替代方案。
方法：本荟萃分析中包含的所有研究都比较了AWP与USO对UIS的疗效，并通过跨多个数据库的全面搜索获得。荟萃分析通过CochraneCollaboration的RevMan5.4软件计算效应大小进行。
结果：本次分析共纳入8篇文献，AWP组148例，USO组163例。汇总估计表明，综合达罗标准或改良的梅奥手腕评分没有显着差异，改良的梅奥手腕评分,DASH分数,握力,VAS评分,术后尺骨变异。另一方面,AWP组患者的并发症较少(OR=0.17,95CI0.05-0.54,P=0.003),再手术率较低(OR=0.12,95CI0.05-0.28,P<0.00001).
结论：两种手术技术均可有效治疗UIS，但AWP组的并发症较少，再次手术率较低。因此,AWP可能为UIS治疗提供了更好的替代方案。
