Kyung Cheon Kim, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, 640 Daesa-Dong, Jung-Gu, Daejeon 301-721, South Korea.
Am J Sports Med. 2014 Feb;42(2):451-6. doi: 10.1177/0363546513512770. Epub 2013 Dec 6.
A few studies have compared high-grade partial-thickness articular- and bursal-side rotator cuff tears postoperatively.
To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of high-grade partial-thickness rotator cuff tears treated with arthroscopic conversion to full-thickness tears, followed by repair.
Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Forty-three consecutive shoulders with high-grade partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (20 articular- and 23 bursal-side lesions) treated with arthroscopic conversion to full-thickness tears, followed by repair using the suture-bridge technique, were evaluated. The final functional evaluation was conducted at a mean of 35.53 months (range, 24-54 months). Radiological outcomes were evaluated at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively. The following outcome measures were used in this study: the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder Rating Scale, the Constant score, and range of motion.
At the final follow-up, the mean ASES, UCLA, and Constant scores improved significantly to 91.80, 32.70, and 75.85, respectively, in the articular-side group (all P < .001). The mean ASES, UCLA, and Constant scores improved significantly to 90.80, 32.52, and 83.00, respectively, in the bursal-side group (all P < .001). The UCLA and ASES scores did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (P = .821 and .869, respectively), while the Constant scores did (P = .048). The retear rate was 0% in the articular-side group and 9.5% in the bursal-side group; this difference was not significant (P = .204).
The arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness bursal-side tears resulted in comparable or superior postoperative functional outcomes compared with that of articular-side tears. However, the postoperative retear rate did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.
已有少数研究对术后高级别部分厚度关节侧和滑囊侧肩袖撕裂进行了比较。
比较关节镜下转为全层撕裂后修复治疗高级别部分厚度肩袖撕裂的临床和影像学结果。
队列研究;证据水平,3 级。
连续 43 例高级别部分厚度肩袖撕裂(20 例关节侧和 23 例滑囊侧病变)患者接受关节镜下转为全层撕裂,然后使用缝合桥技术修复。最终功能评估在平均 35.53 个月(范围,24-54 个月)时进行。术后至少 1 年进行影像学评估。本研究使用以下评估方法:美国肩肘外科医师协会(ASES)评分、加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校(UCLA)肩部评分、Constant 评分和活动范围。
在最终随访时,关节侧组的平均 ASES、UCLA 和 Constant 评分分别显著提高至 91.80、32.70 和 75.85(均 P <.001)。滑囊侧组的平均 ASES、UCLA 和 Constant 评分分别显著提高至 90.80、32.52 和 83.00(均 P <.001)。两组间 UCLA 和 ASES 评分无显著差异(P =.821 和.869),而 Constant 评分有显著差异(P =.048)。关节侧组的再撕裂率为 0%,滑囊侧组为 9.5%;两组间差异无统计学意义(P =.204)。
关节镜下修复部分厚度滑囊侧撕裂的术后功能结果与关节侧撕裂相似或更优。然而,两组间的术后再撕裂率无显著差异。