Sayegh Eli T, Mascarenhas Randy, Chalmers Peter N, Cole Brian J, Verma Nikhil N, Romeo Anthony A
College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy. 2014 Dec;30(12):1642-9. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.05.007. Epub 2014 Jul 4.
The aim of this study was to assess clinical outcomes and radiological outcomes after osteochondral allograft reconstruction for glenoid bone loss.
Glenoid bone loss can occur in the setting of recurrent glenohumeral instability and poses a challenge for surgeons. Reconstruction of these defects with allografts has been proposed as an alternative to both arthroscopic stabilization and nonanatomic bony augmentation procedures with autografts. We conducted a systematic review of the literature for studies of any level of evidence that reported clinical or radiological outcomes (or both) after allograft reconstruction for glenoid deficiency in the setting of recurrent shoulder instability. Data collected included study and patient characteristics, surgical technique, outcome scores, range of motion, strength, subjective outcomes, radiological outcomes, and complications. Data from studies with a sample size of at least 5 were pooled in the main analysis. Studies were assessed for the presence of methodological bias.
Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Three studies were deemed eligible for pooled analysis. The study group consisted of 70 shoulders with a mean age of 27.7 years (74.6% of participants were men) and a mean follow-up period of 44.5 ± 17.7 (range, 32 to 90) months. The mean final Rowe score was 90.6, representing a mean improvement of 57.5. Only 9.8% of patients complained of persistent or unimproved pain, and 93.4% were satisfied. Bony integration of the allograft was documented in 100% of shoulders. Recurrence of glenohumeral dislocation and overall instability were seen in 2.9% and 7.1% of cases, respectively.
The current body of Level IV data suggests that allograft reconstruction for glenoid bone loss provides excellent clinical outcomes, low rates of recurrent instability, and high osseous incorporation rates with no evidence of graft resorption.
Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.
本研究旨在评估关节盂骨缺损的同种异体骨软骨移植重建术后的临床疗效和影像学疗效。
关节盂骨缺损可发生于复发性盂肱关节不稳的情况下,对外科医生构成挑战。同种异体骨移植重建这些缺损已被提议作为关节镜稳定术和自体骨非解剖性骨增强术的替代方法。我们对文献进行了系统回顾,以寻找任何证据水平的研究,这些研究报告了复发性肩关节不稳情况下同种异体骨移植重建关节盂缺损后的临床或影像学疗效(或两者)。收集的数据包括研究和患者特征、手术技术、疗效评分、活动范围、力量、主观疗效、影像学疗效和并发症。样本量至少为5的研究数据纳入主要分析。评估研究是否存在方法学偏倚。
八项研究符合纳入标准并纳入本综述。三项研究被认为符合汇总分析的条件。研究组包括70例肩关节,平均年龄27.7岁(74.6%的参与者为男性),平均随访期为44.5±17.7(范围32至90)个月。最终平均Rowe评分为90.6,平均改善57.5。只有9.8%的患者抱怨持续疼痛或疼痛未改善,93.4%的患者表示满意。100%的肩关节记录到同种异体骨的骨整合。盂肱关节脱位和总体不稳的复发率分别为2.9%和7.1%。
目前的IV级数据表明,同种异体骨移植重建关节盂骨缺损可提供优异的临床疗效、低复发不稳率和高骨融合率,且无移植物吸收的证据。
IV级,IV级研究的系统综述。