Boehm T D, Werner A, Radtke S, Mueller T, Kirschner S, Gohlke F
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Koenig-Ludwig-Haus, University of Wuerzburg, Brettreichstrasse 11, D-97074 Wuerzburg, Germany.
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 Jun;87(6):819-23. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B6.15638.
In a prospective, randomised study on the repair of tears of the rotator cuff we compared the clinical results of two suture techniques for which different suture materials were used. We prospectively randomised 100 patients with tears of the rotator cuff into two groups. Group 1 had transosseous repair with No. 3 Ethibond using modified Mason-Allen sutures and group 2 had transosseous repair with 1.0 mm polydioxanone cord using modified Kessler sutures. After 24 to 30 months the patients were evaluated clinically using the Constant score and by ultrasonography. Of the 100 patients, 92 completed the study. No significant statistical difference was seen between the two groups: Constant score, 91% vs 92%; rate of further tear, 18% vs 22%; and revision, 4% vs 4%. In cases of further tear the outcome in group 2 did not differ from that for the intact repairs (91% vs 91%), but in group 1 it was significantly worse (94% vs 77%, p = 0.005). Overall, seven patients had complications which required revision surgery, in four for pain (two in each group) and in three for infection (two in group 1 and one in group 2).
在一项关于肩袖撕裂修复的前瞻性随机研究中，我们比较了使用不同缝合材料的两种缝合技术的临床效果。我们将100例肩袖撕裂患者前瞻性随机分为两组。第1组采用3号Ethibond缝线经骨修复，使用改良的Mason-Allen缝线；第2组采用1.0 mm聚二氧六环酮缝线经骨修复，使用改良的Kessler缝线。24至30个月后，使用Constant评分和超声检查对患者进行临床评估。100例患者中，92例完成了研究。两组之间未见显著统计学差异：Constant评分，91%对92%；再次撕裂率，18%对22%；翻修率，4%对4%。在再次撕裂的病例中，第2组的结果与完整修复的结果无差异（91%对91%），但第1组明显更差（94%对77%，p = 0.005）。总体而言，7例患者出现并发症，需要进行翻修手术，4例因疼痛（每组2例），3例因感染（第1组2例，第2组1例）。
