ELHT Evidence Hub
  • HOME
  • FOCUS ON YOUR SPECIALTY OR PROFESSION
  • STUDY SKILLS
  • FICTION, LEISURE AND SELF-HELP

Ankle arthrodesis-Open versus arthroscopic: A systematic review and meta-analysis

27/1/2017

0 Comments

 
Author(s): Honnenahalli Chandrappa M.; Hajibandeh S.

Source: Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma; Jan 2017

Publication Date: Jan 2017

Abstract:Objectives: Our objective was to perform a systematic review of the literature and conduct a meta-analysis to investigate the outcomes of open versus arthroscopic methods of ankle fusion. Methods: In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement standards, we performed a systematic review. Electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched to identify randomised and non-randomised studies comparing outcomes of arthroscopic and open ankle arthrodesis. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality and risk of bias of the selected studies. Fixed-effect or random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data. Results: We identified one prospective cohort study and 5 retrospective cohort studies, enrolling a total of 286 patients with ankle arthritis. Our analysis showed that open ankle fusion was associated with a lower fusion rate (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13-0.52, P = 0.0002), longer tourniquet time (MD 16.49, 95% CI 9.46-23.41, P. <. 0.00001), and longer length of stay (MD 1.60,95% CI 1.10-2.10, P. <. 0.00001) compared to arthroscopic ankle fusion; however, there was no significant difference between two groups in terms of infection rate (OR 2.41, 95% CI 0.76-7.64, P = 0.14), overall complication rate (OR: 1.54, 95% CI 0.80-2.96, P = 0.20), and operation time (MD 4.09, 95% CI -2.49-10.66, P = 0.22). The between-study heterogeneity was high for tourniquet time but low or moderate for other outcomes. The direction of the effect sizes remains unchanged throughout sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: The best available evidence demonstrates that arthroscopic ankle fusion may be associated with a higher fusion rate, shorter tourniquet time, and shorter length of stay compared to open ankle fusion. We found no significant difference between two groups in terms of infection rate, overall complication rate, and operation time. The best available evidence is not adequately robust to make definitive conclusions. Long-term results of the comparative efficacy of arthroscopic ankle fusion over open ankle fusion are not currently available. Further high quality randomised controlled trials that are adequately powered are required.Copyright © 2017.
0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    The following databases were searched:
    EMBASE,  MEDLINE, PsycINFO, BNI, CINAHL, 
    to find  ELHT staff publications

    Specialties

    All
    ANAESTHETICS
    CARDIOLOGY
    CRITICAL CARE
    DERMATOLOGY
    DIABETES
    ELDERLY CARE
    EMERGENCY CARE
    GASTROENTEROLOGY
    GYNAECOLOGY
    JUNIOR DOCTORS
    MAXILLOFACIAL
    NEONATOLOGY
    NEUROLOGY
    NURSING
    OBSTETRICS
    ONCOLOGY
    OPHTHALMOLOGY
    ORTHOPAEDICS
    PAEDIATRICS
    PATHOLOGY
    PHYSIOTHERAPY
    RADIOLOGY
    RENAL
    RESPIRATORY
    RHEUMATOLOGY
    STROKE
    SURGERY
    UROLOGY
    VASCULAR SURGERY

    RSS Feed

    Archives - past 2 years

    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017

Picture
Contact us
Picture
Support
Picture
Feedback
Picture
Performance
Picture
Catalogue
Picture
News
Picture
OpenAthens
Picture
Search
Picture
Privacy Policy
Connect with us
Picture
Picture
Picture