Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation versus traditional open surgeries for treatment of gluteal muscle contracture:a meta analysis
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2014.33.028
- VernacularTitle:关节镜下射频松解与开放手术治疗臀肌挛缩症疗效比较的Meta分析
- Author:
Shiyou REN
;
Changqing JIANG
;
Wei LI
;
Wentao ZHANG
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
hip;
contracture;
arthoscopy;
treatment outcome;
meta analysis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2014;(33):5407-5412
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND:A large number of studies have reported that endoscopic radiofrequency ablation surgeries were better than traditional open surgeries for gluteal muscle contracture, but there is no meta-analysis on the clinical outcomes of endoscopic surgeries versus traditional open surgeries.
OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effects of endoscopic radiofrequency ablation surgeries versus traditional open surgeries in the treatment of gluteal muscle contracture.
METHODS:Eligible studies were identified from electronic databases including EMbase, Medline, PubMed, OVID, Cochrane Library, Springerlink, CNKI, WanFang, and VIP between January 1970 and May 2014. The literatures about the clinical efficacy of endoscopic radiofrequency ablation surgeries versus traditional open surgeries in the treatment of gluteal muscle contracture were retrieved. We screened the retrieved literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and performed a Meta analysis with the software RevMan 5.2 after identification of the relevant data.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:A total of 830 patients from 14 studies were included for the analysis, including 394 patients who underwent endoscopic surgeries and 436 patients who underwent traditional open surgeries. Among the main outcomes measured, the incidence of postoperative pain (relative risk=0.33, 95%confidence interval (CI):0.27-0.42, P<0.001) and postoperative complications (odds ratio=0.40, 95%CI:0.23-0.70, P=0.001) in the endoscopic surgery group were significantly lower than that in the traditional open surgery group. The curative effects showed no significant difference between the two groups (odds ratio=1.09, 95%CI:0.52-2.26, P=0.82). Among the secondary outcomes measured, the incision length, postoperative off-bed activity time and postoperative hospitalization in the endoscopic surgery group were significantly better than that in the traditional open surgery group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the surgery duration and recurrence rate (P>0.05) between the two groups. Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation surgeries are similar to traditional open surgeries in the curative effects, recurrence rate and surgery duration, and are better than traditional open surgeries in the incisional length, postoperative pain, postoperative off-bed activity time, postoperative hospitalization and postoperative complication.
