■可以使用各种皮肤切口收获自体腿筋移植物,如垂直,横向,和斜切口,从不同的本地化,包括前内侧和后内侧收获部位。这项研究的目的是比较前内侧和后内侧入路在临床结果方面的研究。隐神经损伤,感染,手术时间,移植物长度,切口长度,运动范围,患者满意度。
■遵循2020年系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目,在PubMed和Scopus进行了搜索,重点研究比较腿筋收获的前内侧和后内侧入路。本研究已在PROSPERO国际前瞻性系统评价登记册(CRD42023450249)注册。使用改良的Coleman方法评分评价方法学质量。赔率比(OR)和平均差异(MD)量化的二分和连续结果,分别。
■五篇文章,涉及405个膝盖,进行了分析。四项研究是3级证据,而1是1级。前内侧腿筋收获显示出隐神经损伤的发生率较高(OR,9.77;95%置信区间[CI],2.19-43.65;p=0.003)和更长的手术时间,MD约为13分钟(MD,13.33;95%CI,0.68-25.97;p=0.04),与后内侧入路相比。前内侧方法产生了更长的半腱肌移植物,MD约为17毫米(MD,17.57;95%CI,7.17-27.98;p=0.0009)。然而,运动范围没有显著差异,屈曲挛缩,无意的嫁接收获,感染率,和患者报告的结果。值得注意的是,后内侧组报告化妆品满意度较高,92%的人非常满意,与80%的前内侧组相比(p=0.005)。然而,两组的总体满意度相似(p=0.35),前内侧组为72%,后内侧组为78%。
■与后内侧入路相比,前内侧腿筋收获显示更大的隐神经损伤和更长的手术时间,以及更长的移植物。然而,运动范围没有观察到显著差异,屈曲挛缩,嫁接收获,感染,或患者结果。
UNASSIGNED: The hamstring autograft can be harvested using various skin incisions, such as vertical, transverse, and oblique incisions, and from different localizations, including anteromedial and posteromedial harvest sites. The aim of this study was to compare studies on the anteromedial and posteromedial approaches for hamstring autograft harvest in terms of clinical outcomes, saphenous nerve injury, infection, operative time, graft length, incision length, range of motion, and patient satisfaction.
UNASSIGNED: Following the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, a search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus, focusing on studies comparing anteromedial and posterior approaches for hamstring harvest. This study was registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023450249). Methodological quality was evaluated using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) quantified dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: Five articles, involving 405 knees, underwent analysis. Four studies were level 3 evidence, while 1 was level 1. The anteromedial hamstring harvest showed higher rates of saphenous nerve injury (OR, 9.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.19-43.65; p = 0.003) and longer operative times, with an MD of about 13 minutes (MD, 13.33; 95% CI, 0.68-25.97; p = 0.04), compared to the posteromedial approach. The anteromedial method yielded a longer semitendinosus graft, with an MD of about 17 mm (MD, 17.57; 95% CI, 7.17-27.98; p = 0.0009). However, no significant differences existed in range of motion, flexion contracture, unintentional graft harvest, infection rates, and patient-reported outcomes. Notably, the posteromedial group reported higher cosmetic satisfaction, with 92% being very satisfied, compared to the anteromedial group with 80% (p = 0.005). However, overall satisfaction levels were similar between the 2 groups (p = 0.35), with a very satisfied rate of 72% for the anteromedial group and 78% for the posteromedial group.
UNASSIGNED: The anteromedial hamstring harvest showed greater saphenous nerve injury and longer operative times compared to the posteromedial approach, along with a longer graft. However, no significant differences were observed in the range of motion, flexion contracture, graft harvest, infection, or patient outcomes.