Uncertainty and risk of misleading conclusions: an umbrella review of the quality of the evidence for ankle arthroscopy

Background and purpose: Ankle arthroscopy is being increasingly utilized, but its potential benefits and harms remain unclear. This umbrella review aimed to assess the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses comparing ankle arthroscopy with equivalent open procedures or nonoperative options....

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Acta orthopaedica Ročník 96; s. 574 - 583
Hlavní autoři: Ponkilainen, Ville, Panula, Valtteri, Laaksonen, Juho, Laurema, Anniina, Miettinen, Mikko, Mattila, Ville M, Karjalainen, Teemu
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: Sweden MJS Publishing, on behalf of the Nordic Orthopedic Federation 25.07.2025
Medical Journals Sweden
Témata:
Ankle arthroscopy
Ankle Injuries - surgery
Ankle Joint - surgery
Arthroscopy
Arthroscopy - methods
Evidence based medicine
Foot and ankle
Humans
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Research waste
Systematic Reviews as Topic
Uncertainty
ISSN:1745-3674, 1745-3682, 1745-3682
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Background and purpose: Ankle arthroscopy is being increasingly utilized, but its potential benefits and harms remain unclear. This umbrella review aimed to assess the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses comparing ankle arthroscopy with equivalent open procedures or nonoperative options.Methods: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL was conducted on March 22, 2025. 2 reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Systematic reviews assessing ankle arthroscopy versus any surgery or nonoperative treatment were included. The methodological quality of the reviews was evaluated using AMSTAR 2 criteria, along with an evaluation of whether the GRADE tool was appropriately applied.Results: The literature search identified 430 studies, of which 29 systematic reviews were included after the screening process. These reviews covered various conditions, including lateral ankle instability, osteoarthritis, fractures, and osteochondral defects. None of the systematic reviews included RCTs comparing arthroscopic procedures with nonoperative treatment. A methodological assessment using AMSTAR 2 criteria identified multiple critical flaws across all reviews, leading to an overall confidence rating of “critically low” for each. 1 study adequately applied the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.Conclusion: The efficacy of ankle arthroscopic procedures remains based solely on observational evidence. Given the critically low methodological quality of existing reviews, conclusions suggesting benefits of ankle arthroscopy, particularly over open procedures, are unreliable and insufficient to inform clinical recommendations. RCTs comparing ankle arthroscopy with nonoperative treatments or sham surgery are urgently needed.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:1745-3674
1745-3682
1745-3682
DOI:10.2340/17453674.2025.44330