Suppr超能文献

肱二头肌长头肌腱损伤的肱二头肌肌腱切断术与肌腱固定术:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

Biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis for lesions of the long head of the biceps tendon: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

Zhou Peng, Liu Juncai, Deng Xiangtian, Li Zhong

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University.

Sichuan ProvincialLaboratory of Orthopaedic Engineering, Lu Zhou, Si Chuan Province.

出版信息

Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Jan 22;100(3):e23993. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023993.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Biceps tenotomy and biceps tenodesis are 2 most common surgical procedures for long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) pathology, but debate still exists regarding the choice of treatment. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare clinical results between tenotomy and tenodesis for the treatment of lesions of LHBT. It was hypothesized that there is no difference in outcomes of tenotomy and tenodesis for lesions of LHBT.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of literature published between 1980 and April 2020 was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tenotomy and tenodesis for LHBT lesions were included. The primary outcomes were Constant score and Popeye deformity. The secondary outcomes included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, muscle strength, cramping pain, and operative time. For primary outcomes, trial sequential analysis (TSA) was conducted to reduce the risk of random errors and the GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations) approach was used to assess the quality of the body of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs were included. In pooled analysis, statistical significance was observed in the Constant score (mean difference [MD], 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04-3.14; P = .04), Popeye deformity (risk ratio [RR], 0.33; 95% CI, 0.22-0.49; P < .00001) and operative time (MD, 9.94; 95% CI 8.39-11.50; P < .00001). However, there were no significant differences between the tenodesis and tenotomy in ASES score (P = .71), VAS for pain (P = .79), cumulative elbow flexion strength (P = .85), cumulative elbow supination strength (P = .23), and cramping pain (P = .61) TSA revealed that the results for Constant score was inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

For the treatment of LHBT lesions, with the exception of constant score, there was no significant benefit of tenodesis over tenotomy. Although tenotomy is affected by a higher risk of Popeye sign, it is more timesaving.

摘要

背景

肱二头肌肌腱切断术和肱二头肌肌腱固定术是治疗肱二头肌长头肌腱(LHBT)病变最常见的两种外科手术,但在治疗方式的选择上仍存在争议。本荟萃分析旨在比较肌腱切断术和肌腱固定术治疗LHBT病变的临床效果。研究假设是肌腱切断术和肌腱固定术治疗LHBT病变的疗效无差异。

方法

使用MEDLINE、EMBASE、科学网和Cochrane图书馆数据库对1980年至2020年4月发表的文献进行全面检索。纳入比较肌腱切断术和肌腱固定术治疗LHBT病变的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局指标为Constant评分和“大力水手”畸形。次要结局指标包括美国肩肘外科医师(ASES)评分、疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)、肌肉力量、痉挛性疼痛和手术时间。对于主要结局指标,进行序贯试验分析(TSA)以降低随机误差风险,并采用GRADE(推荐分级、评估、制定和评价)方法评估证据质量。

结果

共纳入9项RCT。在汇总分析中,Constant评分(平均差[MD],1.59;95%置信区间[CI] 0.04 - 3.14;P = 0.04)、“大力水手”畸形(风险比[RR],0.33;95% CI,0.22 - 0.49;P < 0.00001)和手术时间(MD,9.94;95% CI 8.39 - 11.50;P < 0.00001)有统计学意义。然而,肌腱固定术和肌腱切断术在ASES评分(P = 0.71)、疼痛VAS(P = 0.79)、累计肘关节屈曲力量(P = 0.85)、累计肘关节旋后力量(P = 0.23)和痉挛性疼痛(P = 0.61)方面无显著差异。TSA显示Constant评分结果尚无定论。

结论

对于LHBT病变的治疗,除Constant评分外,肌腱固定术并不比肌腱切断术有显著优势。虽然肌腱切断术出现“大力水手”征的风险较高,但更节省时间。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1075/7837917/92ce84876bf6/medi-100-e23993-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