VetSRev
Database of veterinary systematic reviews
Database of veterinary systematic reviews
Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology : V.C.O.T (2008) 21: 106–109
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 four manuscripts 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.
Evans, R. B., Gordon-Evans, W. J., & Conzemius, M. G. (2008). Comparison of three methods for the management of fragmented medial coronoid process in the dog. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology : V.C.O.T, 21(2), 106–109. https://doi.org/10.3415/Vcot-07-04-0031 Animals, Dogs, Treatment Outcome, Arthroscopy/methods/veterinary, Dog Diseases/pathology/surgery, Joint Diseases/pathology/surgery/veterinary, Osteotomy/methods/veterinary