Suppr超能文献

比较肩袖撕裂的非手术治疗和手术治疗的改善时间。

Comparative Time to Improvement in Nonoperative and Operative Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears.

机构信息

Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (A.S. and N.B.J.), Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation (N.B.J. and J.E.K.), and Biostatistics (J.D. and G.D.A.), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.

King Edward Memorial Hospital, Hamilton, Bermuda.

出版信息

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020 Jul 1;102(13):1142-1150. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.19.01112.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Comparative time to recovery after operative and nonoperative treatment for rotator cuff tears is an important consideration for patients. Hence, we compared the time to achieve clinically meaningful reduction in shoulder pain and function after treatment.

METHODS

From February 2011 to June 2015, a multicenter cohort of patients with rotator cuff tears undergoing operative or nonoperative treatment was recruited. After propensity score weighting, the Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the time to achieve a minimal clinically important difference (MCID), >30% reduction, and >50% reduction in the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores. (In our analysis, both ASES and SPADI were coded such that a lower number corresponded to a better outcome; thus, the word "reduction" was used to indicate improvement in both ASES and SPADI scores.) A 2-stage test was conducted to detect a difference between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

In this cohort, 96 patients underwent nonoperative treatment and 73 patients underwent a surgical procedure. The surgical treatment group and the nonoperative treatment group were significantly different with respect to SPADI and ASES scores (p < 0.05). The maximum difference between groups in achievement of the MCID for the SPADI scores was at 3.25 months, favoring the nonoperative treatment group. The probability to achieve the MCID was 0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00 to 0.12) for the surgical treatment group compared with 0.40 (95% CI, 0.29 to 0.50) for the nonoperative treatment group. The surgical treatment group had a greater probability of achieving >50% reduction in SPADI scores at 15.49 months (0.20 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.29] for the surgical treatment group compared with 0.04 [95% CI, 0.00 to 0.09] for the nonoperative treatment group). The surgical treatment group had a greater probability of achieving >50% reduction in ASES scores at 24.74 months (0.96 [95% CI, 0.84 to 0.99] for the surgical treatment group compared with 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.75] for the nonoperative treatment group). The differences for >30% reduction in SPADI and ASES scores and the MCID for ASES scores were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing nonoperative treatment had significantly better outcomes in the initial follow-up period compared with patients undergoing a surgical procedure, but this trend reversed in the longer term. These data can be used to inform expectations for nonoperative and operative treatments for rotator cuff tears.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

摘要

背景

手术和非手术治疗肩袖撕裂后恢复时间的比较是患者的一个重要考虑因素。因此,我们比较了治疗后实现肩部疼痛和功能临床有意义减轻的时间。

方法

从 2011 年 2 月至 2015 年 6 月,招募了接受手术或非手术治疗的肩袖撕裂多中心队列患者。在进行倾向评分加权后,Kaplan-Meier 法用于估计达到最小临床重要差异(MCID)、>30%减轻和>50%减轻肩痛和残疾指数(SPADI)和美国肩肘外科医生(ASES)评分的时间。(在我们的分析中,ASES 和 SPADI 都被编码,以便较低的数字表示更好的结果;因此,“减轻”一词用于表示 ASES 和 SPADI 评分的改善。)进行了两阶段检验以检测两组之间的差异。

结果

在该队列中,96 例患者接受非手术治疗,73 例患者接受手术治疗。手术治疗组和非手术治疗组在 SPADI 和 ASES 评分方面存在显著差异(p<0.05)。在达到 SPADI 评分 MCID 方面,两组之间的最大差异为 3.25 个月,有利于非手术治疗组。手术治疗组达到 MCID 的概率为 0.06(95%置信区间[CI],0.00 至 0.12),而非手术治疗组为 0.40(95%CI,0.29 至 0.50)。手术治疗组在 15.49 个月时更有可能达到 SPADI 评分>50%的减轻(手术治疗组为 0.20[95%CI,0.12 至 0.29],而非手术治疗组为 0.04[95%CI,0.00 至 0.09])。手术治疗组在 24.74 个月时更有可能达到 ASES 评分>50%的减轻(手术治疗组为 0.96[95%CI,0.84 至 0.99],而非手术治疗组为 0.66[95%CI,0.53 至 0.75])。SPADI 和 ASES 评分>30%减轻和 ASES 评分 MCID 的差异不显著。

结论

与接受手术治疗的患者相比,接受非手术治疗的患者在初始随访期间的结果明显更好,但这种趋势在长期内发生逆转。这些数据可用于告知肩袖撕裂的非手术和手术治疗的预期。

证据水平

治疗性 II 级。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参见作者说明。

相似文献

3
Which Is the Best Outcome Measure for Rotator Cuff Tears?肩袖撕裂的最佳结局测量指标是什么?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019 Aug;477(8):1869-1878. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000800.

引用本文的文献

5
Rotator cuff tears.肩袖撕裂。
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2024 Feb 8;10(1):8. doi: 10.1038/s41572-024-00492-3.
7
Current trends in rehabilitation of rotator cuff injuries.肩袖损伤康复的当前趋势。
SICOT J. 2023;9:14. doi: 10.1051/sicotj/2023011. Epub 2023 May 23.
8
Recent Advances in Orthopedic Surgery for Sports Injuries.运动损伤骨科手术的最新进展
Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2023;11(2):136-139. doi: 10.22038/ABJS.2022.63412.3060.

本文引用的文献

6
The enigma of rotator cuff tears and the case for uncertainty.肩袖撕裂之谜与不确定性情况
Br J Sports Med. 2018 Oct;52(19):1222. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099063. Epub 2018 Apr 12.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验