Comparison of three methods for the management of fragmented medial coronoid process in the dog: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

43 Scopus citations

Abstract

The objective of this review and analysis was to compare arthroscopy, medial arthrotomy and medical management for treating fragmented coronoid process in the dog. The data come from manuscripts published in peer-reviewed veterinary journals, and the study design is a systematic review followed by meta-analysis. The meta-analysis combines data from a set of studies so that surgical techniques and medial management can be compared in a single analysis. Several literature databases and veterinary texts were thoroughly searched to provide a list of over 400 candidate manuscripts. Inclusion criteria were used to filter the candidate manuscripts to a final set of fourmanuscripts that directly pertained to the clinical question. They were scored for their evidentiary value using a semi-objective measure. The results were that arthroscopy was superior to medial arthrotomy and medical management, but medial arthrotomy was not superior to medical management. Only one manuscript was a randomized controlled trial, hence the results must be tempered by the evidentiary value of the data.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)106-109
Number of pages4
JournalVeterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Volume21
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2008

Keywords

  • Arthroscopy
  • FMCP
  • Medial arthrotomy
  • Meta-analysis
  • Systematic review

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of three methods for the management of fragmented medial coronoid process in the dog: A systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this