Ejnisman B, Andreoli C V, Soares B G O, Fallopa F, Peccin M S, Abdalla R J, Cohen M
Orthopaedic Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Av. Lineu de Paula Machado, 660, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004(1):CD002758. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002758.pub2.
Tears of the rotator cuff tendons, which surround the joints of the shoulder, are one of the most common causes of pain and disability in the upper extremity.
To review the efficacy and safety of common interventions for tears of the rotator cuff in adults.
We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised trail register (July 2002), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library issue 2, 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2001), EMBASE (1974 to December 2001), Biological Abstracts (1980 to December 2001), LILACS (1982 to December 2001), CINAHL (November 1982 to December 2001), Science Citation Index and reference lists of articles. We also contacted authors and handsearched conference proceedings focusing on shoulder conditions.
Randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials involving tears of the rotator cuff were the focus of this review. All trials involving conservative interventions or surgery were included (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intra-articular or subacromial glucocorticosteroid injection, oral glucocorticosteroid treatment, physiotherapy, and open or arthroscopic surgery).
Two reviewers independently assessed suitability for inclusion, methodological quality and extracted data. Dichotomous data were presented as relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), using the fixed effects model.
Eight trials involving 455 people were included and 393 patients analysed. Trials were grouped in eight categories of conservative or surgical treatment. The median quality score of all trials combined was 16 out of a possible 24 points, with a range of 12-18. In general, included trials differed on diagnostic criteria for rotator cuff tear, there was no uniformity in reported outcome measures, and data which could be summarised were rarely reported. Only results from two studies comparing open repair to arthroscopic debridement could be pooled. There is weak evidence for the superiority of open repair of rotator cuff tears compared with arthroscopic debridement.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence to support or refute the efficacy of common interventions for tears of rotator cuff in adults. As well as the need for further well designed clinical trials, uniform methods of defining interventions for rotator cuff tears and validated outcome measures are also essential.
肩袖肌腱环绕肩关节,其撕裂是上肢疼痛和功能障碍的最常见原因之一。
综述成人肩袖撕裂常见干预措施的疗效和安全性。
我们检索了Cochrane肌肉骨骼损伤组专业试验注册库(2002年7月)、Cochrane对照试验注册库(《Cochrane图书馆》2002年第2期)、MEDLINE(1966年至2001年12月)、EMBASE(1974年至2001年12月)、生物学文摘数据库(1980年至2001年12月)、拉丁美洲和加勒比卫生科学数据库(1982年至2001年12月)、护理学与健康照护数据库(1982年11月至2001年12月)、科学引文索引以及文章的参考文献列表。我们还联系了作者并手工检索了聚焦肩部疾病的会议论文集。
本综述重点关注涉及肩袖撕裂的随机或半随机临床试验。纳入所有涉及保守干预或手术的试验(非甾体类抗炎药、关节内或肩峰下糖皮质激素注射、口服糖皮质激素治疗、物理治疗以及开放手术或关节镜手术)。
两名评价员独立评估纳入的适宜性、方法学质量并提取数据。二分类数据采用固定效应模型以相对危险度(RR)和95%置信区间(CI)呈现。
纳入八项试验,共455人,分析了393例患者。试验分为八类保守或手术治疗。所有试验合并后的质量评分中位数为满分24分中的16分,范围为12 - 18分。总体而言,纳入试验在肩袖撕裂的诊断标准上存在差异,报告的结局指标不统一,且很少报告可汇总的数据。仅两项比较开放修复与关节镜清创术的研究结果可以合并。与关节镜清创术相比,开放修复肩袖撕裂术优越性的证据不足。
几乎没有证据支持或反驳成人肩袖撕裂常见干预措施的疗效。除了需要进一步设计良好的临床试验外,统一肩袖撕裂干预措施的定义方法和经过验证的结局指标也至关重要。