scholarly journals Combined medial patellofemoral and medial patellotibial reconstruction for patellar instability: a PRISMA systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rocco Aicale ◽  
Nicola Maffulli

Abstract Background The medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) works in association with the medial patellotibial ligament (MPTL) and the medial patellomeniscal ligament (MPML) to impart stability to the patellofemoral joint. The anatomy and biomechanical characteristics of the MPFL have been well described but little is known about the MPTL and MPML. Several reconstruction procedures of the MPFL with semitendinosus, gracilis, patellar and quadriceps tendons, allografts and synthetic grafts have been described. No clear superiority of one surgical technique over another is evident. Methods A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were articles that reported clinical outcomes of combined reconstruction of MPTL and MPFL. The methodological quality of the articles was determined using the modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS). Results Nine articles were included, reporting the clinical outcomes of 197 operated knees. The surgical procedures described include hamstrings grafting and transfer of the medial patellar and quadriceps tendons with or without bony procedures to reconstruct the MPTL in association with the MPFL. Overall, good and excellent outcomes were achieved. The median CMS is 70.6 ± 14.4 (range 38 to 84). Conclusion Different techniques are reported, and outcomes are good with low rates of recurrence. The quality of the articles is variable, ranging from low to high. Appropriately powered randomized controlled trials are needed to better understand what the adequate indications for surgery in patients with patellar instability and clinical outcomes are. Combined reconstruction of MPFL and MPTL leads to favourable clinical outcomes, supporting its role as a valid surgical procedure for patellar stabilization.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R Vago ◽  
Resh Gupta ◽  
Sara Lazar

One potential pathway by which mindfulness-based meditation improves health outcomes is through changes in cognitive functioning. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) was conducted with a focus on assessing the state of the evidence for effects on cognitive processes and associated assays. Here, we comment on confounding issues surrounding the reporting of these and related findings, including 1) criteria that appropriately define an MBI; 2) limitations of assays used to measure cognition; and 3) methodological quality of MBI trials and reporting of findings. Because these issues contribute to potentially distorted interpretations of existing data, we offer constructive means for interpretation and recommendations for moving the field of mindfulness research forward regarding the effects on cognition.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 773
Author(s):  
Wei-Ting Wu ◽  
Tsung-Min Lee ◽  
Der-Sheng Han ◽  
Ke-Vin Chang

The association of sarcopenia with poor clinical outcomes has been identified in various medical conditions, although there is a lack of quantitative analysis to validate the influence of sarcopenia on patients with lumbar degenerative spine disease (LDSD) from the available literature. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with LDSD and examine its impact on clinical outcomes. The electronic databases (PubMed and Embase) were systematically searched from inception through December 2020 for clinical studies investigating the association of sarcopenia with clinical outcomes in patients with LDSD. A random-effects model meta-analysis was carried out for data synthesis. This meta-analysis included 14 studies, comprising 1953 participants. The overall prevalence of sarcopenia among patients with LDSD was 24.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.3%–34.3%). The relative risk of sarcopenia was not significantly increased in patients with LDSD compared with controls (risk ratio, 1.605; 95% CI, 0.321–8.022). The patients with sarcopenia did not experience an increase in low back and leg pain. However, lower quality of life (SMD, −0.627; 95% CI, −0.844–−0.410) were identified postoperatively. Sarcopenia did not lead to an elevated rate of complications after lumbar surgeries. Sarcopenia accounts for approximately one-quarter of the population with LDSD. The clinical manifestations are less influenced by sarcopenia, whereas sarcopenia is associated with poorer quality of life after lumbar surgeries. The current evidence is still insufficient to support sarcopenia as a predictor of postoperative complications.


Surgeries ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-230
Author(s):  
Andrew A. Gumbs ◽  
Manana Gogol ◽  
Gaya Spolverato ◽  
Hebatallah Taher ◽  
Elie K. Chouillard

Introduction: Integrative medicine (IM) is a relatively new field where non-traditional therapies with peer-reviewed evidence are incorporated or integrated with more traditional approaches. Methods: A systematic review of the literature from the last 10 years was done by searching clinical trials and randomized-controlled trials on Pubmed that discuss nutrition, supplementation, and lifestyle changes associated with “Pancreatic Cancer.” Results: Only 50 articles ultimately met the inclusion criteria for this review. A total of 15 articles discussed the role of obesity and 10 discussed the influence of stress in increasing the risk of pancreatic cancer. Six discussed the potential beneficial role of Vitamins, 5 of cannabinoids, 4 an anti-inflammatory diet, 3 of nut consumption, 2 of green tea consumption, 2 of curcumin supplementation, 1 role of melatonin, and 1 of probiotics. One article each was found on the theoretical benefits of adhering to either a Mediterranean or ketogenic diet. Discussion: As more surgeons become interested in IM, it is hoped that more diseases where the curative treatment is mainly surgical can benefit from the all-encompassing principles of IM in an effort to improve quality of life and survival in patients with pancreatic cancer.


2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 1899-1907 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeoungjee Cho ◽  
David W. Johnson ◽  
Sunil Badve ◽  
Jonathan C. Craig ◽  
Giovanni F.K. Strippoli ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Siwanon Rattanakanokchai ◽  
Nuntasiri Eamudomkarn ◽  
Nampet Jampathong ◽  
Bao-Yen Luong-Thanh ◽  
Chumnan Kietpeerakool

AbstractThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess associations between changing gloves during cesarean section (CS) and postoperative infection. A literature search was conducted using the major electronic databases MEDLINE, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL, and CENTRAL from their inception to September 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing glove change during CS to no glove change were included. Outcomes of interest were endometritis, febrile morbidity, and incisional surgical site infection (SSI). GRADE approach was applied to assess the quality of evidence. Ten reports of six studies involving 1707 participants were included in the analyses. Glove change was associated with a reduction in the risk of incisional SSI following CS (pooled RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30, 0.78; moderate quality of evidence). Compared to no glove change, glove change during CS did not reduce the risks of endometritis (pooled RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80, 1.24; low quality of evidence) or febrile morbidity (pooled RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.43, 1.71; very low quality of evidence). Changing gloves during CS was associated with a decreased risk of incisional SSI. The risks of postoperative endometritis and febrile morbidity were not altered by changing gloves.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver T. Nguyen ◽  
Amir Alishahi Tabriz ◽  
Jinhai Huo ◽  
Karim Hanna ◽  
Christopher M. Shea ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND E-visits involve asynchronous communication between providers and patients through a secure web-based platform, such as a patient portal, to elicit symptoms and determine a diagnosis and treatment plan. E-visits are now reimbursable through Medicare due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The state of the evidence regarding e-visits, such as the impact on clinical outcomes and healthcare delivery, is unclear. OBJECTIVE To address this gap, this systematic review examines how e-visits have impacted clinical outcomes and healthcare quality, access, utilization, and costs. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through October 2020 for peer-reviewed studies that assessed e-visits’ impact on clinical and healthcare delivery outcomes. RESULTS Out of 1,858 papers, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. E-visit usage was associated with improved or comparable clinical outcomes, especially for chronic disease management (e.g., diabetes care, blood pressure management). The impact on quality of care varied across conditions. Quality of care was equivalent or better for chronic conditions but variable quality was observed in infection management (e.g., appropriate antibiotic prescribing). Similarly, the impact on healthcare utilization varied across conditions (e.g., lower utilization for dermatology) but mixed impact in primary care. Healthcare costs were lower for e-visits for a wide-range of conditions (e.g., dermatology and acute visits). No studies examined the impact of e-visits on healthcare access. Available studies are observational in nature and it is difficult to draw firm conclusions about effectiveness or impact on care delivery. CONCLUSIONS Overall, the evidence suggests e-visits may provide comparable clinical outcomes to in-person care and reduce healthcare costs for certain healthcare conditions. At the same time, there is mixed evidence on healthcare quality, especially regarding infection management (e.g., sinusitis, urinary tract infections, conjunctivitis). Further studies are needed to test implementation strategies that might improve delivery (e.g., clinical decision support for antibiotic prescribing) and to assess which conditions are amenable to e-visits and which conditions require in-person or face-to-face care (e.g., virtual visit). CLINICALTRIAL not applicable


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document