Vaswani Ravi, Arner Justin, Freiman Halle, Bradley James P
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Burke and Bradley Orthopaedics, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2020 Dec 3;8(12):2325967120967652. doi: 10.1177/2325967120967652. eCollection 2020 Dec.
Revision posterior shoulder capsulolabral repair has inferior outcomes compared with primary surgery. Risk factors for revision in throwing athletes are unknown.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to characterize the revision rate and risk factors for revision surgery in throwing athletes. It was hypothesized that female athletes and those with smaller glenoid bone width would be at higher risk for revision surgery.
Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.
A total of 105 throwing athletes who underwent arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair of their throwing shoulder were reviewed at a minimum of 2-year follow-up, and patients who required a revision were compared with those who did not. Collected data compared between the revision and no-revision groups included age, sex, contact sport participation, and return to sport (RTS). American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic (KJOC) score, stability, pain, strength, range of motion (ROM), and patient satisfaction. Radiographic parameters including glenoid bone version, cartilage version, labral version, bone width, labral width, glenoid labral version and width weight were also compared between both groups.
Nine throwers required revision (8.6%) at an average of 2.8 years postoperatively. There were more female athletes in the revision than no-revision group (55.5% vs 23.4%; = .03). There was no significant difference in age, proportion of contact athletes, rotator cuff tears, glenoid bone version, cartilage version, labral version, labral version weight, bone width, labral width, or labral width weight. Both groups had similar preoperative, postoperative, and change in ASES, KJOC, pain, strength, stability, and ROM scores. The proportion of patients with full strength and with full ROM, as well as patients who were satisfied with outcomes was similar between groups. Fewer patients in the revision group returned to sports compared with those in the no-revision group (14.3% vs 83.6%; < .001), although return to sports at same level was not significantly different between groups (14.3% vs 37.2%; = .41).
The revision rate of arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization in throwers was 8.6%. Female athletes were at higher risk for revision, and return to sports was lower in patients who underwent revision surgery.
与初次手术相比,翻修性肩关节后方关节囊盂唇修复术的效果较差。投掷运动员翻修手术的风险因素尚不清楚。
目的/假设:本研究的目的是确定投掷运动员翻修手术的翻修率及风险因素。研究假设为女性运动员和肩胛盂骨宽度较小的运动员翻修手术风险更高。
病例对照研究;证据等级,3级。
对105例行关节镜下投掷肩后方关节囊盂唇修复术的投掷运动员进行了至少2年的随访,将需要翻修的患者与未翻修的患者进行比较。翻修组和未翻修组之间收集并比较的数据包括年龄、性别、接触性运动参与情况和恢复运动(RTS)情况。美国肩肘外科医师学会(ASES)评分、克伦-乔布骨科诊所(KJOC)评分、稳定性、疼痛、力量、活动范围(ROM)和患者满意度。还比较了两组之间的影像学参数,包括肩胛盂骨形态、软骨形态、盂唇形态、骨宽度、盂唇宽度、肩胛盂盂唇形态和宽度权重。
9名投掷运动员(8.6%)平均在术后2.8年需要翻修。翻修组的女性运动员比未翻修组更多(55.5%对23.4%;P = 0.03)。在年龄、接触性运动员比例、肩袖撕裂、肩胛盂骨形态、软骨形态、盂唇形态、盂唇形态权重、骨宽度、盂唇宽度或盂唇宽度权重方面没有显著差异。两组在术前、术后以及ASES、KJOC、疼痛、力量、稳定性和ROM评分的变化方面相似。两组之间完全恢复力量和完全恢复ROM的患者比例以及对结果满意的患者比例相似。与未翻修组相比,翻修组恢复运动的患者较少(14.3%对83.6%;P < 0.001),尽管两组在恢复到相同水平运动方面没有显著差异(14.3%对37.2%;P = 0.41)。
投掷运动员关节镜下肩关节后方稳定术的翻修率为8.6%。女性运动员翻修风险更高,接受翻修手术的患者恢复运动的情况较差。