Suppr超能文献

单排与双排肩袖盂唇复合体修复:盂唇复合体-关节盂骨界面接触压力和表面积的对比评估。

Single-row versus double-row capsulolabral repair: a comparative evaluation of contact pressure and surface area in the capsulolabral complex-glenoid bone interface.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju Christian Hospital, Yonsei University, Wonju, Korea.

出版信息

Am J Sports Med. 2011 Jul;39(7):1500-6. doi: 10.1177/0363546511399863. Epub 2011 Mar 30.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite the attention that has been paid to restoration of the capsulolabral complex anatomic insertion onto the glenoid, studies comparing the pressurized contact area and mean interface pressure at the anatomic insertion site between a single-row repair and a double-row labral repair have been uncommon.

PURPOSE

The purpose of our study was to compare the mean interface pressure and pressurized contact area at the anatomic insertion site of the capsulolabral complex between a single-row repair and a double-row repair technique.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Thirty fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders (mean age, 61 ± 8 years; range, 48-71 years) were used for this study. Two types of repair were performed on each specimen: (1) a single-row repair and (2) a double-row repair. Using pressure-sensitive films, we examined the interface contact area and contact pressure.

RESULTS

The mean interface pressure was greater for the double-row repair technique (0.29 ± 0.04 MPa) when compared with the single-row repair technique (0.21 ± 0.03 MPa) (P = .003). The mean pressurized contact area was also significantly greater for the double-row repair technique (211.8 ± 18.6 mm(2), 78.4% footprint) compared with the single-row repair technique (106.4 ± 16.8 mm(2), 39.4% footprint) (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The double-row repair has significantly greater mean interface pressure and pressurized contact area at the insertion site of the capsulolabral complex than the single-row repair.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The double-row repair may be advantageous compared with the single-row repair in restoring the native footprint area of the capsulolabral complex.

摘要

背景

尽管人们已经关注到修复关节囊盂唇复合体解剖附着在关节盂上,但比较单排修复与双排盂唇修复技术在解剖附着点的受压接触面积和平均界面压力的研究却很少见。

目的

本研究旨在比较单排修复与双排盂唇修复技术在关节囊盂唇复合体解剖附着点的平均界面压力和受压接触面积。

研究设计

对照实验室研究。

方法

本研究使用了 30 个新鲜冷冻的尸体肩关节(平均年龄 61 ± 8 岁;范围 48-71 岁)。对每个标本进行了两种修复:(1)单排修复,(2)双排修复。使用压力敏感膜,我们检查了界面接触面积和接触压力。

结果

双排修复技术的平均界面压力(0.29 ± 0.04 MPa)大于单排修复技术(0.21 ± 0.03 MPa)(P =.003)。双排修复技术的平均受压接触面积也显著大于单排修复技术(211.8 ± 18.6 mm²,78.4%的足迹)(P =.001)。

结论

双排修复在关节囊盂唇复合体的附着点处具有明显更大的平均界面压力和受压接触面积,优于单排修复。

临床相关性

与单排修复相比,双排修复在恢复关节囊盂唇复合体的固有足迹面积方面可能具有优势。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验