Search

Purpose: A persisting gender bias has been recently highlighted in orthopaedics and sports medicine. The aim of this study was to evaluate the volume of gender‐specific data and gender‐specific results in the treatment of a common tendon disease, Achilles tendinopathy. Methods: Pubmed, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched to identify all clinical studies focusing on Achilles tendinopathy treatment. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment‐Achilles (VISA‐A) data of women and men of the studies that disaggregated results by gender were collected, and a meta‐analysis was conducted. Treatment response within and in between gender categories was evaluated, focusing on overall gender‐disaggregated data, as well as within each of the three treatment categories: conservative treatment, injective treatment and surgical treatment. A formal risk of bias analysis was conducted using Downs and Black's grading system. Results: Out of the 8796 papers screened, 178 were included after the screening. The number of female study participants grew from 20% up to 1990 to 48% in the years 2019–2022. Only 373 out of 3423 (11%) female patients and 685 of 4352 (16%) male patients were found in sex‐disaggregated studies. A meta‐analysis was conducted on the 14 papers that reported sex‐disaggregated data for VAS and VISA‐A. The meta‐analysis revealed that there was no difference in the overall treatment response between women and men and that both genders showed an overall significant treatment benefit in terms of VAS and VISA‐A values. However, significant differences were documented within the treatment categories. While no differences were found in surgical studies, in conservative treatment studies, men experienced lower posttreatment VAS values (p = 0.004). The largest difference was found in injective treatments, with men experiencing a larger change in VAS values (men = −3.0, women = −1.0, p = 0.016) and higher posttreatment VISA‐A values (p = 0.032). Conclusion: This systematic review and meta‐analysis showed a lack of awareness of the importance of sex‐specific data within Achilles tendinopathy treatment research. The proportion of female study subjects has grown over the years, but there is still a large data gap caused by the absence of sex‐disaggregated data. The omission of sex‐disaggregated data causes the loss of valuable knowledge on the true effectiveness of current Achilles tendinopathy treatment. The results of this study indicate that women profit less from available treatments, particularly injective approaches, which prompts further research for treatment adaptation by gender. Level of Evidence: Level IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Rotator cuff (RC) disorders are the most common cause of shoulder disability. The aim of this study was to quantify the evidence on the sex‐related differences in RC repair. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed in January 2023 in PubMed, Wiley Cochrane Library and Web of Science on research articles on humans with RC tears treated surgically. A meta‐analysis was performed to compare results in men and women. The Downs and Black score and the modified Coleman methodology score (MCMS) were used to assess the retrieved studies. Results: A total of 39,909 patients were enroled in the 401 studies analysed (45% women, 55% men). A trend toward more sex‐balanced recruitment was observed over time. Only 4% of the studies on 1.5% of the documented patients presented disaggregated outcome data and were quantitatively analysed. A tendency for lower range of motion values after surgery was found for external shoulder rotation in women, with 39.9° ± 6.9° versus 45.3° ± 4.1° in men (p = 0.066). According to Downs and Black scores, four studies were good and 12 fair, with a main MCMS score of 69/100. Conclusion: There is a lack of awareness on the importance to document women‐ and men‐specific data. Only 4% of the articles disaggregated data, and it was possible to analyse only 1.5% of the literature population, a sample which cannot be considered representative of all patients. The lack of disaggregated data is alarming and calls for action to better study men and women differences to optimise the management of RC tears. This will be necessary to provide sex‐specific information that could be of clinical relevance when managing RC repair. Level of Evidence: Level IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To compare one-stage vs. two-stage bilateral unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) in terms of complications, mortality, reinterventions, transfusion rate, days to discharge, and outcomes for the treatment of bilateral mono-compartmental knee osteoarthritis.A systematic review was performed in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to February 2021. Randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, and case series describing the use of bilateral UKA were retrieved. A meta-analysis was performed on complications, mortality, reinterventions, transfusion rate, and days to discharge comparing one-stage vs. two-stage replacement, and outcomes were also reported. Assessment of risk of bias and quality of evidence was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.Fifteen articles were included on 1451 patients who underwent bilateral UKA (44.9% men, 55.1% women, mean age 66 years). The systematic review documented, for bilateral one-stage UKA: 2.6% major and 5.4% minor complication rates, 0.5% mortality, 1.9% reintervention, 4.1% transfusion rates, and 4.5 mean days to discharge. No studies reported functional differences. The meta-analysis did not find differences for major complications, minor complications, mortality, reintervention, transfusion rates, or days to discharge versus two-stage bilateral procedures. The operative time was 112.3 vs. 125.4 minutes for one-stage and two-stage surgeries, respectively. The overall quality of the retrieved studies was high.Bilateral single-stage UKA is a safe procedure, with a few complications, and overall positive clinical results. No differences were found in terms of complications, mortality, reinterventions, transfusion rate, and days to discharge in comparison with the two-stage approach. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:1063-1072. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210047., Competing Interests: ICMJE Conflict of interest statement: All authors declare no support from any organization for the submitted work; Christian Candrian has received institutional support outside the present work from Medacta International SA, Johnson & Johnson, Lima Corporate, Zimmer Biomet, and Oped AG. Stefano Zaffagnini has received institutional support from Fidia Farmaceutici, Cartiheal, IGEA Clinical Biophysics, Biomet, and Kensey Nash. He has also received grant support from I+ and royalties from Springer., (© 2021 The author(s).)