Department of Pathology and Surgery, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
J Arthroplasty. 2012 Apr;27(4):551-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.06.004. Epub 2011 Jul 28.
The aim of this study was to compare the muscle grade and bulk of the divided and repaired piriformis tendon by the standard posterior approach with the preserved tendon by a piriformis-sparing (PS) approach, in total hip arthroplasty. Twenty-two patients were randomized to either approach. Patients received preoperative and 3 months and 2 years postoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. Patients and evaluators were blinded to allocation. There was significantly less deterioration in piriformis muscle grade (P = .029) and bulk (P = .015) in the PS group at 3 months. At 2 years, only the difference in grade remained significant (P = .001). There was no difference in Oxford hip scores. In conclusion, a PS approach avoids the marked wasting and deterioration in muscle grade that occurs postoperatively in the standard posterior approach.
本研究旨在比较标准后入路(standard posterior approach)与保留梨状肌肌腱的入路(a piriformis-sparing [PS] approach)对髋关节置换术患者的梨状肌肌腱切断修复后肌肉等级和肌肉块的影响。22 名患者被随机分配至这两种手术方式。患者分别在术前、术后 3 个月和 2 年接受磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging)扫描。患者和评估者对分组情况均不知情。PS 组在术后 3 个月时梨状肌肌肉等级(P =.029)和肌肉块(P =.015)的恶化程度显著较低。2 年后,仅肌肉等级的差异仍具有统计学意义(P =.001)。牛津髋关节评分(Oxford hip scores)无差异。综上,PS 入路可避免标准后入路术后梨状肌肌肉等级的显著下降。