Suppr超能文献

肱二头肌切断术与肌腱固定术:临床疗效和生物力学结果的综述。

Biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis: a review of clinical outcomes and biomechanical results.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612-3835, USA.

出版信息

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011 Mar;20(2):326-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.019. Epub 2010 Nov 4.

Abstract

HYPOTHESIS

There are significant differences in incidence of cosmetic deformity and load to tendon failure between biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis for the treatment of long head of the biceps brachii (LHB) tendon lesions which are supported by the evidence-based strengths and weaknesses of each procedure in the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for eligible clinical and biomechanical articles relating to biceps tenotomy or tenodesis from 1966 to 2010. Keywords were biceps tenotomy, biceps tenodesis, long head of the biceps brachii, and Popeye sign. All relevant studies were included based on study objectives, and excluded studies consisted of abstracts, case reports, letters to the editor, and articles without outcome measures.

RESULTS

All articles reviewed were of level IV evidence. Combined results from reviewed papers on the differences between LHB tenotomy vs tenodesis demonstrated a higher incidence of cosmetic deformity in patients treated with biceps tenotomy. Complications were similar for each treatment, with a higher likelihood of bicipital pain associated with tenodesis. Lack of high levels of evidence from prospective randomized trials limits our ability to recommend one technique over another.

DISCUSSION

This review demonstrated a higher incidence of cosmetic deformity in patients treated with biceps tenotomy compared with tenodesis, with an associated lower load to tendon failure. However, there was no consensus in the literature regarding the use of tenotomy vs. tenodesis for LHB tendon lesions due to variable results and methodology of published studies. Individual patient factors and needs should guide surgeons on whether to use tenotomy or tenodesis.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a great need for future studies with high levels of evidence, control, randomization, and power, with well-defined study variables, to compare biceps tenotomy and tenodesis for the treatment of LHB tendon lesions.

摘要

假设

在治疗肱二头肌长头腱(LHB)病变方面,与经皮肱二头肌切断术相比,经皮肱二头肌固定术在美容畸形和肌腱断裂负荷方面存在显著差异,这一假设基于文献中每种手术的循证优势和劣势。

材料和方法

从 1966 年至 2010 年,在 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 数据库中搜索与经皮肱二头肌切断术或固定术相关的符合条件的临床和生物力学文章。关键词为肱二头肌切断术、肱二头肌固定术、肱二头肌长头腱和 Popeye 征。所有相关研究均根据研究目的纳入,排除了仅为摘要、病例报告、给编辑的信和没有结果测量的文章。

结果

所有综述文章均为 IV 级证据。对经皮肱二头肌切断术与固定术治疗 LHB 病变差异的综述文章的综合结果表明,经皮肱二头肌切断术治疗的患者美容畸形发生率较高。每种治疗方法的并发症相似,固定术相关的二头肌疼痛发生率较高。由于前瞻性随机试验缺乏高水平证据,限制了我们推荐一种技术优于另一种技术的能力。

讨论

本综述表明,与经皮肱二头肌固定术相比,经皮肱二头肌切断术治疗的患者美容畸形发生率较高,与肌腱断裂负荷较低相关。然而,由于发表研究的结果和方法存在差异,文献中对于 LHB 病变使用经皮肱二头肌切断术与固定术仍没有共识。患者个体因素和需求应指导外科医生选择使用经皮肱二头肌切断术或固定术。

结论

非常需要未来开展具有高水平证据、对照、随机和效能的研究,明确研究变量,比较经皮肱二头肌切断术和固定术治疗 LHB 病变。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验