Efficacy of non-surgical interventions for promoting improved functional outcomes following acute compartment syndrome: A systematic review

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
• Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
• Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
• Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
• Emerging · Emerging topic under active research

Abstract (original English)

Background Acute compartment syndrome (ACS) is a devastating complication which develops following a traumatic extremity injury that results in increased pressure within osteofascial compartments, thereby leading to ischemia, muscle and nerve necrosis, and creates a life-threatening condition if left untreated. Fasciotomy is the only available standard surgical intervention for ACS. Following fasciotomy the affected extremity is plagued by prolonged impairments in function. As such, an unmet clinical need exists for adjunct, non-surgical therapies which can facilitate accelerated functional recovery following ACS. Thus, the purpose of this systematic review was to examine the state of the literature for non-surgical interventions that aim to improve muscle contractile functional recovery of the affected limb following ACS. Methods English language manuscripts which evaluated non-surgical interventions for ACS, namely those which evaluated the function of the affected extremity, were identified as per PRISMA protocols via searches within three databases from inception to February 2022. Qualitative narrative data synthesis was performed including: study characteristics, type of interventions, quality, and outcomes. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation's (SYRCLE) RoB tool and reported level of evidence for each ar

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.