Suppr超能文献

锁骨远端切除治疗肩锁关节关节炎合并肩袖撕裂患者能否减轻疼痛或改善肩部功能?一项荟萃分析。

Does Distal Clavicle Resection Decrease Pain or Improve Shoulder Function in Patients With Acromioclavicular Joint Arthritis and Rotator Cuff Tears? A Meta-analysis.

机构信息

J. Wang, S.-W. Zhu, H.-B. Jia, X.-L. Ma, Department of Orthopaedics, Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin, China J.-X. Ma, X.-L. Ma, Department of Orthopaedics Institute, Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin, China.

出版信息

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Dec;476(12):2402-2414. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000424.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Acromioclavicular joint arthritis is a common, painful, and often missed diagnosis, and it often accompanies other shoulder conditions such as rotator cuff disease. Whether distal clavicle resection is important to perform in patients undergoing surgery for rotator cuff tears and concomitant acromioclavicular joint arthritis is controversial.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of distal clavicle resection on (1) outcome scores; (2) shoulder ROM, joint pain or tenderness, and joint instability; and (3) risk of reoperation among patients treated surgically for rotator cuff tears who had concomitant acromioclavicular joint arthritis.

METHODS

We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to find RCTs that met our eligibility criteria, which, in summary, (1) compared rotator cuff repair plus distal clavicle resection with isolated rotator cuff repair for patients who sustained a full- or partial-thickness rotator cuff tear and concomitant acromioclavicular joint arthritis; and (2) the followup period was at least 2 years. Two reviewers screened the studies, extracted the data and evaluated the methodological quality, and performed data analysis. Statistical heterogeneity among studies was quantitatively evaluated with the I index. No heterogeneity was detected (I = 0%; p = 0.75) in terms of acromioclavicular joint pain or tenderness, Constant score, forward flexion, external rotation, and risk of reoperation, so fixed-effect models were used in these endpoints. Heterogeneity was moderate for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score (I = 53%; p = 0.12) and low for the visual analog scale (VAS) score (I = 35%; p = 0.22), so random-effect models were used in these endpoints. Subgroup analysis was stratified by the symptom of acromioclavicular joint arthritis. Three RCTs with 208 patients were included. We evaluated the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool; in aggregate, the three RCTs included showed low to intermediate risk, although not all parameters of the Cochrane tool could be assessed for all studies.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the distal clavicle resection plus rotator cuff repair group and the isolated rotator cuff repair group in ASES score (mean difference =1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.37 to 6.18; p = 0.56) nor in terms of the VAS score and Constant score. Likewise, we found no difference in ROM of the shoulder (forward flexion, internal rotation, and external rotation) or acromioclavicular joint pain or tenderness between the groups (pooled results of acromioclavicular joint pain or tenderness: risk ratio [RR], 1.59; 95% CI, 0.67-3.78; p = 0.30). Acromioclavicular joint instability was only detected in the rotator cuff repair plus distal clavicle resection group. Finally, we found no difference in the proportion of patients undergoing repeat surgery between the study groups (pooled results of risk of reoperation for the rotator cuff repair plus distal clavicle resection and isolated rotator cuff repair: one of 52 versus two of 78; RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.11-6.48; p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Distal clavicle resection in patients with rotator cuff tears did not result in better clinical outcome scores or shoulder ROM and was not associated with a lower risk of reoperation. Distal clavicle resection might cause acromioclavicular joint instability in patients with rotator cuff tears and concomitant asymptomatic acromioclavicular joint arthritis. Arthroscopic distal clavicle resection is not recommended in patients with rotator cuff tears and concomitant acromioclavicular joint arthritis. Additional well-designed RCTs with more participants, long-term followup, and data on patient-reported outcomes are needed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

摘要

背景

肩锁关节关节炎是一种常见的、疼痛的疾病,且常被漏诊,常伴有肩袖疾病等其他肩部疾病。在接受肩袖撕裂和同时伴有肩锁关节关节炎手术的患者中,是否进行锁骨远端切除术对手术结果有重要影响,这一点存在争议。

目的

本研究旨在对随机对照试验(RCT)进行系统回顾和荟萃分析,以评估锁骨远端切除术对(1)术后评分;(2)肩关节活动度、关节疼痛或压痛、关节不稳定;以及(3)接受肩袖撕裂修复术同时伴有肩锁关节关节炎的患者的再手术风险的影响。

方法

我们系统地检索了 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 数据库,以找到符合我们纳入标准的 RCT,简而言之,(1)比较肩袖修复加锁骨远端切除术与单纯肩袖修复治疗全层或部分肩袖撕裂和同时伴有肩锁关节关节炎的患者;(2)随访时间至少 2 年。两位审稿人筛选了研究,提取了数据并评估了方法学质量,并进行了数据分析。使用 I 指数对研究间的统计学异质性进行定量评估。在肩锁关节疼痛或压痛、Constant 评分、前屈、外展和再手术风险方面,没有检测到异质性(I = 0%;p = 0.75),因此这些终点采用固定效应模型。美国肩肘外科医生(ASES)评分(I = 53%;p = 0.12)和视觉模拟评分(VAS)(I = 35%;p = 0.22)的异质性为中度,因此这些终点采用随机效应模型。亚组分析按肩锁关节关节炎的症状分层。共有 3 项 RCT 纳入了 208 例患者。我们使用 Cochrane 风险偏倚工具评估了偏倚风险;总体而言,这 3 项 RCT 显示低至中风险,尽管并非所有 Cochrane 工具的参数都能对所有研究进行评估。

结果

锁骨远端切除加肩袖修复组与单纯肩袖修复组在 ASES 评分(平均差异=1.41;95%置信区间 [CI],-3.37 至 6.18;p = 0.56)和 VAS 评分和 Constant 评分方面无差异。同样,我们发现两组间的肩关节活动度(前屈、内旋和外展)或肩锁关节疼痛或压痛无差异(肩锁关节疼痛或压痛的汇总结果:风险比 [RR],1.59;95%CI,0.67-3.78;p = 0.30)。只有在肩袖修复加锁骨远端切除组中检测到肩锁关节不稳定。最后,我们发现两组间的再手术比例无差异(肩袖修复加锁骨远端切除和单纯肩袖修复的再手术风险的汇总结果:1/52 与 2/78;RR,0.86;95%CI,0.11-6.48;p = 0.88)。

结论

肩袖撕裂患者行锁骨远端切除术并不能改善临床评分或肩关节活动度,也不能降低再手术风险。锁骨远端切除术可能导致肩袖撕裂和同时伴有无症状肩锁关节关节炎的患者发生肩锁关节不稳定。不建议在肩袖撕裂和同时伴有肩锁关节关节炎的患者中进行关节镜下锁骨远端切除术。需要更多参与者、长期随访和患者报告结果数据的设计良好的 RCT。

证据水平

1 级,治疗性研究。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

10
Prognostic Factors for Clinical Outcomes After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair.关节镜下肩袖修补术后临床结果的预后因素
Orthop J Sports Med. 2023 Apr 12;11(4):23259671231160738. doi: 10.1177/23259671231160738. eCollection 2023 Apr.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验