Iwata Eiichiro, Shigematsu Hideki, Inoue Kazuya, Egawa Takuya, Sakamoto Yoshihiro, Tanaka Yasuhito
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Nara Medical University, 840 Shijo-cho, Kashiharashi, Nara 634-8522, Japan.
Sakamoto Orthopedic Clinic, Nara, Japan.
Open Orthop J. 2017 Sep 30;11:1081-1086. doi: 10.2174/1874325001711011081. eCollection 2017.
Rotator cuff tears and cervical spondylotic amyotrophy (CSA) are often confused as the main symptom in those with difficulty in shoulder elevation. Empty and full can tests are frequently used for the clinical diagnosis of rotator cuff tears. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the empty and full can test results can help differentiate rotator cuff tears from CSA.
Twenty-seven consecutive patients with rotator cuff tears and 25 with CSA were enrolled. We prospectively performed empty and full can tests in patients with rotator cuff tears and CSA. The following signs were considered positive: (a) muscle weakness during the empty can test, (b) muscle weakness during the full can test, (c) pain provocation during the empty can test, and (d) pain provocation during the full can test. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of rotator cuff tears for each positive finding.
The sensitivity and specificity of each index were as follows (sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV): (a) 77.8%, 0%, 45.7%, 0%; (b) 66.7%, 4.0%, 42.9%, 10.0%; (c) 88.9%, 96.0%, 96.0%, 88.9%; and (d) 74.1%, 96.0%, 95.2%, 77.4%. There were significant differences for each index.
Muscle weakness during the empty and full can tests was not useful in differentiating rotator cuff tears from CSA because of low specificity and PPV. However, pain provocation was useful in differentiating these two conditions because of high specificity and PPV.
肩袖撕裂和神经根型颈椎病性肌萎缩(CSA)在肩部抬高困难的患者中常被混淆为主要症状。空罐试验和满罐试验常用于肩袖撕裂的临床诊断。本研究的目的是探讨空罐试验和满罐试验结果是否有助于区分肩袖撕裂和CSA。
连续纳入27例肩袖撕裂患者和25例CSA患者。我们对肩袖撕裂和CSA患者前瞻性地进行了空罐试验和满罐试验。以下体征被视为阳性:(a)空罐试验时肌肉无力,(b)满罐试验时肌肉无力,(c)空罐试验时疼痛激发,(d)满罐试验时疼痛激发。我们计算了每个阳性发现对肩袖撕裂的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。
各指标的敏感性和特异性如下(敏感性、特异性、PPV、NPV):(a)77.8%,0%,45.7%,0%;(b)66.7%,4.0%,42.9%,10.0%;(c)88.9%,96.0%,96.0%,88.9%;(d)74.1%,96.0%,95.2%,77.4%。各指标存在显著差异。
空罐试验和满罐试验时的肌肉无力因特异性和PPV较低,对区分肩袖撕裂和CSA无用。然而,疼痛激发因特异性和PPV较高,对区分这两种情况有用。