Liu Cen Tao, Ge Heng An, Hu Rui, Huang Jing Biao, Cheng Yi Chao, Wang Min, Wu Peng, Cheng Biao
Department of Orthopedics, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2018 May-Aug;26(2):2309499018770897. doi: 10.1177/2309499018770897.
The comparison of clinical outcomes of arthroscopic footprint-preserving knotless single-row repair with the tear completion repair technique for articular-sided partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PTRCTs) remains unclear.
A total of 68 patients diagnosed with articular-sided PTRCTs who underwent rotator cuff repair between December 2014 and June 2015 were included. Of the 68 patients, 30 received footprint-preserving knotless single-row repair (group 1) and 38 received the tear completion repair technique (group 2). Preoperative and postoperative assessments were compared.
Both groups had significantly improved American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores (group 1: 48.2 preoperatively to 81.9 postoperatively, p < 0.001; group 2: 47.1 preoperatively to 84.9 postoperatively, p < 0.001) and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score (group 1: 6.0 preoperatively to 0.93 postoperatively, p < 0.001; group 2: 6.1 preoperatively to 1.1 postoperatively, p < 0.001), showing that the two procedures significantly improved postoperative shoulder function. No significant differences were shown in ASES score or VAS pain score between the two groups ( p > 0.05). The mean operation time was significantly shorter in group 1 with an average of 48.1 min than in group 2 with an average of 60.4 min ( p < 0.001).
Footprint-preserving knotless single-row repair obtains similar clinical results compared to tear completion repair in the treatment of articular-sided PTRCTs. Footprint-preserving knotless single-row repair may be a convenient choice for the treatment of articular-sided PTRCTs. Randomized controlled studies are needed to investigate whether the footprint-preserving knotless single-row repair yields better long-term outcomes through the protection of the bursal cuff and restoration of the healthy footprint.
关节镜下保留足迹的无结单排修复与关节侧部分厚度肩袖撕裂（PTRCT）的撕裂完全修复技术的临床结果比较仍不明确。
纳入2014年12月至2015年6月期间68例诊断为关节侧PTRCT并接受肩袖修复的患者。68例患者中，30例接受保留足迹的无结单排修复（第1组），38例接受撕裂完全修复技术（第2组）。比较术前和术后评估。
两组患者的美国肩肘外科医师（ASES）评分（第1组：术前48.2分至术后81.9分，p<0.001；第2组：术前47.1分至术后84.9分，p<0.001）和视觉模拟量表（VAS）疼痛评分（第1组：术前6.0分至术后0.93分，p<0.001；第2组：术前6.1分至术后1.1分，p<0.001）均显著改善，表明两种手术均显著改善了术后肩部功能。两组之间的ASES评分或VAS疼痛评分无显著差异（p>0.05）。第1组的平均手术时间明显短于第2组，第1组平均为48.1分钟，第2组平均为60.4分钟（p<0.001）。
在治疗关节侧PTRCT方面，保留足迹的无结单排修复与撕裂完全修复相比获得了相似的临床结果。保留足迹的无结单排修复可能是治疗关节侧PTRCT的一种便捷选择。需要进行随机对照研究，以调查保留足迹的无结单排修复是否通过保护滑囊袖和恢复健康足迹而产生更好的长期结果。
