Department of Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, 18-20, Waehringerguertel, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Department of Anesthesiology, Medical University of Vienna, 18-20, Waehringerguertel, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2018 Oct;104(6):859-863. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2018.05.013. Epub 2018 Jul 20.
There remains as of yet no consensus on the optimal treatment for total or partial distal biceps tendon repairs. As such, the purpose of this study was to assess functional outcome, the impact of complications and cost effectiveness, in patients undergoing primary distal biceps tendon repair by either cortical button (CB), transosseous suture (TO) or suture anchor (SA).
There is no difference in functional outcome and cost effectiveness, in patients undergoing distal biceps tendon repair.
MATERIAL & METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on prospectively collected data from 47 consecutive patients treated for total or partial distal biceps tendon rupture. Functional outcome was assessed by the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Strength measurements (e.g., flexion, supination and pronation) in the operated and non-operated extremities were recorded with the use of a dynamometer. Furthermore, all complications, as well as their impact on functional outcome and costs for surgical intervention were evaluated.
Minimum follow-up time was 35 weeks, average 46.3±13.8 weeks. The overall DASH score was 7.9±4.7. There were no differences in functional outcome (i.e., DASH score) between CB, TO, SA (p=0.32), nor were there differences in regards to strength (supination, flexion and pronation) (p=0.60) and ability to return to work & sports activity. The total complication rate was 21.6%. Complications had a significant impact on functional outcome (p=0.003). Re-rupture occurred 2 times in the SA group. In 5 patients, revisional surgery had to be performed. The shortest operation times and the lowest material costs were observed in the TO group (p=0.004).
All reported fixation methods for total or partial distal biceps tendon rupture yielded good functional results. However, transosseous suture fixation for total distal biceps tendon rupture, performed through a double incision approach by an experienced surgeon, seems to be a simple, inexpensive and successful method, offering satisfying clinical results.
IV, a retrospective, comparative study.
目前对于全或部分肱二头肌远端肌腱修复术的最佳治疗方法尚未达成共识。因此,本研究旨在评估经皮质扣(CB)、经骨缝合(TO)或缝合锚(SA)行肱二头肌远端肌腱初次修复的患者的功能结果、并发症的影响和成本效益。
在接受肱二头肌远端肌腱修复的患者中,功能结果和成本效益无差异。
对 47 例连续接受全或部分肱二头肌远端肌腱断裂治疗的患者前瞻性收集的数据进行回顾性分析。采用残疾臂、肩和手(DASH)问卷评估功能结果。使用测力计记录手术和非手术肢体的力量测量值(如屈肌、旋后和旋前)。此外,评估所有并发症及其对手术干预的功能结果和成本的影响。
最短随访时间为 35 周,平均 46.3±13.8 周。总体 DASH 评分为 7.9±4.7。CB、TO 和 SA 之间的功能结果(即 DASH 评分)无差异(p=0.32),旋后、屈肌和旋前的力量也无差异(p=0.60),重返工作和运动活动的能力也无差异。总的并发症发生率为 21.6%。并发症对功能结果有显著影响(p=0.003)。SA 组有 2 例再次发生断裂。5 例患者需要进行翻修手术。TO 组的手术时间最短,材料成本最低(p=0.004)。
所有报告的全或部分肱二头肌远端肌腱断裂固定方法均获得良好的功能结果。然而,对于全远端肱二头肌肌腱断裂,由经验丰富的外科医生通过双切口入路行经骨缝合固定,似乎是一种简单、廉价且成功的方法,可提供满意的临床结果。
IV,回顾性比较研究。