Shambaugh Braidy C, Olsen Joshua R, Lacerte Edward, Kellum Ethan, Miller Suzanne L
Orthopaedic Associates, Cranston, Rhode Island, USA.
Canandaigua Orthopaedic Associates, Canandaigua, New York, USA.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2017 Nov 17;5(11):2325967117738551. doi: 10.1177/2325967117738551. eCollection 2017 Nov.
The early repair of acute proximal hamstring ruptures provides better clinical results than delayed repair. However, it is unclear how nonoperative treatment compares with the operative treatment of these injuries.
To compare the clinical results of the nonoperative and operative treatment of acute proximal hamstring ruptures.
Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
A total of 25 patients with complete, retracted proximal hamstring ruptures presenting to 1 institution were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were given the option of proximal hamstring repair at the time of the initial evaluation. Patients with at least 12 months of follow-up from the time of surgery or injury were included in the evaluation. Both nonoperative and operative treatment groups were evaluated using the same outcome measures. The primary outcome measure was the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS). Secondary outcome measures included the Short Form-12 (SF-12) physical and mental component summaries, strength testing, a single-leg hop test, the patient's perception of strength, and the ability to return to activity.
There were 11 patients treated nonoperatively, with a mean follow-up of 2.48 ± 3.66 years, and 14 patients treated operatively, with a mean follow-up of 3.56 ± 2.11 years. The mean LEFS scores for the nonoperative and operative groups were 68.50 ± 7.92 and 74.71 ± 5.38, respectively ( = .07). No statistical differences were found between the groups regarding SF-12 scores and mean single-leg hop distance compared with the uninjured leg. Isometric testing of the injured hamstring in the nonoperative group demonstrated significant clinical weakness compared with the uninjured side at both 45° and 90° of flexion (57.54% ± 7.8% and 67.73% ± 18.8%, respectively). Isokinetic testing of the injured leg in the operative group demonstrated 90.87% ± 16.3% strength of the uninjured leg. All patients in the operative group were able to return to preinjury activities, whereas 3 patients in the nonoperative group were unable to return (chi-square = 4.33, = .07).
Patients with acute proximal hamstring ruptures treated surgically regained approximately 90% strength of the uninjured extremity and tended to have a greater likelihood of returning to preinjury activities than patients treated nonoperatively.
急性近端腘绳肌断裂的早期修复比延迟修复能带来更好的临床效果。然而,对于这些损伤,非手术治疗与手术治疗相比效果如何尚不清楚。
比较急性近端腘绳肌断裂的非手术治疗与手术治疗的临床效果。
队列研究;证据等级,3级。
回顾性分析了在1家机构就诊的25例完全性、回缩性近端腘绳肌断裂患者。所有患者在初次评估时都可选择近端腘绳肌修复。纳入从手术或受伤时间起至少随访12个月的患者进行评估。非手术和手术治疗组均使用相同的结局指标进行评估。主要结局指标是下肢功能量表(LEFS)。次要结局指标包括简明健康调查量表(SF - 12)身体和心理成分总结、力量测试、单腿跳测试、患者对力量的感知以及恢复活动的能力。
11例患者接受非手术治疗,平均随访2.48±3.66年;14例患者接受手术治疗,平均随访3.56±2.11年。非手术组和手术组的平均LEFS评分分别为68.50±7.92和74.71±5.38(P = 0.07)。两组在SF - 12评分以及与健侧相比的平均单腿跳距离方面未发现统计学差异。非手术组中,在45°和90°屈曲时,受伤腘绳肌的等长测试显示与健侧相比存在明显的临床肌无力(分别为57.54%±7.8%和67.73%±18.8%)。手术组中受伤腿的等速测试显示为健侧力量的90.87%±16.3%。手术组所有患者都能够恢复到伤前活动,而非手术组有3例患者无法恢复(卡方检验 = 4.33,P = 0.07)。
与非手术治疗的患者相比,接受手术治疗的急性近端腘绳肌断裂患者恢复了约90%健侧肢体的力量,并且恢复到伤前活动的可能性更大。