4.5 Review

Donor-site morbidity after osteochondral autologous transplantation for osteochondritis dissecans of the capitellum: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY
卷 25, 期 7, 页码 2237-2246

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-017-4516-8

关键词

Osteochondritis dissecans; Capitellum; Graft harvesting; Osteochondral autologous transplantation; Knee; Donor-site morbidity.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To determine the rate of donor-site morbidity after osteochondral autologous transplantation (OATS) for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans. A literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library to identify studies up to November 6, 2016. Criteria for inclusion were OATS for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans, reported outcomes related to donor sites, >= 10 patients, >= 1 year follow-up, and written in English. Donor-site morbidity was defined as persistent symptoms (>= 1 year) or cases that required subsequent intervention. Patient and harvest characteristics were described, as well as the rate of donor-site morbidity. A random effects model was used to calculate and compare weighted group proportions. Eleven studies including 190 patients were included. In eight studies, grafts were harvested from the femoral condyle, in three studies, from either the 5th or 6th costal-osteochondral junction. The average number of grafts was 2 (1-5); graft diameter ranged from 2.6 to 11 mm. In the knee-to-elbow group, donor-site morbidity was reported in 10 of 128 patients (7.8%), knee pain during activity (7.0%) and locking sensations (0.8%). In the rib-to-elbow group, one of 62 cases (1.6%) was complicated, a pneumothorax. The proportion in the knee-to-elbow group was 0.04 (95% CI 0.0-0.15), and the proportion in the rib-to-elbow group was 0.01 (95% CI 0.00-0.06). There were no significant differences between both harvest techniques (n.s.). Donor-site morbidity after OATS for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans was reported in a considerable group of patients. Level IV, systematic review of level IV studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据