23 August 2022 : Meta-Analysis
Optimal Surgical Treatment Method for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture: Results from a Network Meta-Analysis
Yudi Wu1CDEF, Yajia Li2BCD, Jia Guo2BC, Qianxiang Li34BC, Jianhuang Wu35BCD, Ziqin Cao5ABCDEF*, Yulin Song6ABCDEFDOI: 10.12659/MSM.937118
Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e937118
Table 9 Detailed results of main network analysis.
| Treatment | SMD (95% CI) for subjective improvement | SURCA for subjective improvement, % | SMD (95%CI) for Functional improvement | SURCA for functional improvement, % | SMD (95% CI) for activity improvement | SURCA for activity improvement, % | SMD (95% CI) for laxity | SURCA for laxity, % | RR (95% CI) for failure | SURCA for failure, % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| irAllograft | Reference | 1.0 | Reference | 16.0 | Reference | 0.5 | Reference | 0.0 | Reference | 18.4 |
| Autograft | 3.76 (1.88, 5.64) | 55.0 | 0.39 (−0.09, 0.87) | 62.9 | 0.54 (0.30, 0.78) | 58.5 | −1.41 (−1.74, −1.08) | 84.0 | 0.30 (0.13, 0.73) | 89.5 |
| nirAllograft | 4.09 (1.56, 6.62) | 65.2 | 0.25 (−0.37, 0.87) | 42.1 | 0.40 (0.11, 0.69) | 29.5 | −1.19 (−1.64, −0.73) | 47.8 | 0.36 (0.12, 1.07) | 76.0 |
| Hybrid | 3.45 (1.34, 5.56) | 45.7 | 0.14 (−0.45, 0.72) | 29.5 | 0.53 (0.23, 0.84) | 54.5 | −1.08 (−1.51, −0.65) | 35.9 | 0.51 (0.17, 1.55) | 54.7 |
| waRepair | 4.01 (0.49, 7.53) | 61.8 | 0.34 (−0.42, 1.10) | 52.3 | 0.84 (0.46, 1.23) | 94.5 | −1.27 (−1.80, −0.74) | 60.2 | 0.64 (0.18, 2.27) | 42.4 |
| nwaRepair | 4.77 (−0.23, 9.78) | 70.9 | 1.14 (0.17, 2.12) | 97.2 | 0.61 (0.00, 1.22) | 62.5 | −1.36 (−1.88, −0.83) | 72.1 | 1.03 (0.26, 4.07) | 19.1 |