{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture: can repair become an alternative to reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies.
{Author}: Opoku M;Fang M;Lu W;Li Y;Xiao W;
{Journal}: J Orthop Surg Res
{Volume}: 19
{Issue}: 1
{Year}: 2024 Jun 2
{Factor}: 2.677
{DOI}: 10.1186/s13018-024-04812-x
{Abstract}: OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair and ACL reconstruction for acute ACL rupture.
METHODS: We searched Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases to seek relevant studies. Clinical outcomes included failure rate, hardware removal rate, anteroposterior (AP) knee laxity, and patient-reported outcomes. In addition, subgroup analysis was carried out according to repair techniques, rupture locations, and study designs. Funnel plots were used to detect publication bias. All statistical analysis was performed using STATA (version 14.2, StataCorp).
RESULTS: A total of 10 articles were included in this study, comprising 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 cohort studies, involving a total of 549 patients. We found no statistical differences between the ACL repair and ACL reconstruction in the following outcomes: failure rate, AP knee laxity, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS) Score, and Tegner score. However, the ACL repair group had a higher hardware removal rate. Except for AP knee laxity results on different repair techniques, there was no statistical difference in other subgroup analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ACL reconstruction, ACL repair shows similar results in clinical outcomes, and it is promising to be an effective alternative treatment for acute ACL rupture. Larger samples and higher-quality studies are needed to support our results and further explore the advantages of ACL repair in other aspects.
METHODS: Level III.