Suppr超能文献

改良前侧入路与标准前侧入路进行的门静脉间囊切开术的解剖学评估:效用相当但囊膜损伤降低

Anatomic Evaluation of the Interportal Capsulotomy Made with the Modified Anterior Portal versus Standard Anterior Portal: Comparable Utility with Decreased Capsule Morbidity.

作者信息

Weber Alexander E, Alluri Ram K, Makhni Eric C, Bolia Ioanna K, Mayer Eric N, Harris Joshua D, Nho Shane J

机构信息

USC Epstein Family Center for Sports Medicine at Keck Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, USA.

出版信息

Hip Pelvis. 2020 Mar;32(1):42-49. doi: 10.5371/hp.2020.32.1.42. Epub 2020 Feb 26.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To identify potential differences in interportal capsulotomy size and cross-sectional area (CSA) using the anterolateral portal (ALP) and either the: (i) standard anterior portal (SAP) or (ii) modified anterior portal (MAP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten cadaveric hemi pelvis specimens were included. A standard arthroscopic ALP was created. Hips were randomized to SAP (n=5) or MAP (n=5) groups. The spinal needle was placed at the center of the anterior triangle or directly adjacent to the ALP in the SAP and MAP groups, respectively. A capsulotomy was created by inserting the knife through the SAP or MAP. The length and width of each capsulotomy was measured using digital calipers under direct visualization. The CSA and length of the capsulotomy as a percentage of total iliofemoral ligament (IFL) side-to-side width were calculated.

RESULTS

There were no differences in mean cadaveric age, weight or IFL dimensions between the groups. Capsulotomy CSA was significantly larger in the SAP group compared with the MAP group (SAP 2.16±0.64 cm vs. MAP 0.65±0.17 cm, =0.008). Capsulotomy length as a percentage of total IFL width was significantly longer in the SAP group compared with the MAP group (SAP 74.2±14.1% vs. MAP 32.4±3.7%, =0.008).

CONCLUSION

The CSA of the capsulotomy and the percentage of the total IFL width disrupted are significantly smaller when the interportal capsulotomy is performed between the ALP and MAP portals, compared to the one created between the ALP and SAP. Surgeons should be aware of this fact when performing hip arthroscopy.

摘要

目的

使用前外侧入路(ALP)和以下两种入路之一,确定髋臼切迹大小和横截面积(CSA)的潜在差异:(i)标准前入路(SAP)或(ii)改良前入路(MAP)。

材料与方法

纳入10个尸体半骨盆标本。建立标准关节镜下ALP。将髋关节随机分为SAP组(n = 5)或MAP组(n = 5)。在SAP组和MAP组中,分别将脊椎穿刺针置于前三角中心或紧邻ALP处。通过将刀插入SAP或MAP进行髋臼切迹切开。在直视下使用数字卡尺测量每个髋臼切迹的长度和宽度。计算髋臼切迹的CSA以及髋臼切迹长度占股髂韧带(IFL)左右宽度的百分比。

结果

两组之间的平均尸体年龄、体重或IFL尺寸无差异。与MAP组相比,SAP组的髋臼切迹CSA显著更大(SAP 2.16±0.64 cm对MAP 0.65±0.17 cm,P = 0.008)。与MAP组相比,SAP组中髋臼切迹长度占IFL总宽度的百分比显著更长(SAP 74.2±14.1%对MAP 32.4±3.7%,P = 0.008)。

结论

与在ALP和SAP之间创建的髋臼切迹相比,当在ALP和MAP入路之间进行髋臼切迹切开时,髋臼切迹的CSA以及IFL总宽度中断的百分比显著更小。外科医生在进行髋关节镜检查时应注意这一事实。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/76be/7054079/8439a17bce30/hp-32-42-g001.jpg

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