Early or delay? The most suitable rehabilitation protocol for “no man's land” injury: Meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis—20 years trends

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to analyze various rehabilitation protocol and determine which methods will yield a better outcome. Methods: The database reports were searched within 1990 until 2020, using PubMed, Cochrane library database, Ovid, Medline, and the other several published trials. A statistical analysis was made from Review Manager and Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA). Result: The mean of rerupture rate is 3.3% (n = 8) in the combination protocol and 8% (n = 48) in controlled active motion (CAM) protocol. Meta-analysis found no significant difference between Kleinert versus CAM in rerupture rate. Furhtermore, we found no significant difference in Duran versus CAM in rerupture rate. In TSA, the Z-curve does not cross both of the trial sequential boundaries, a further trial with larger sample will be required. The TSA of flexion contracture CAM versus Kleinert was indicated that CAM protocol may be superior than Kleinert to reduce the incidence of flexion contracture with the range of mean flexion contracture 6.6% (n = 18) in CAM to 23.6% (n = 76) in Kleinert protocol. Conclusion: Current meta-analysis proposed that the combination technique will result less rerupture incidence and better functional outcome in flexor zone II injuries than other techniques. The CAM method also results in less flexion contracture than others. However, a further meta-analysis with larger sample trials seems to be required to confirm this review's conclusion.