Greiner Stefan, Kaeaeb Max, Voss Andreas, Lawton Robert, Bhide Pushkar, Achenbach Leonard
Sporthopaedicum, Straubing and Regensburg, Germany.
Department of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2021 Feb 26;9(2):2325967120984264. doi: 10.1177/2325967120984264. eCollection 2021 Feb.
Superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) represents a new option for the treatment of irreparable rotator cuff tears.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiologic outcomes of SCR and compare them with the outcomes of partial repair (PR) of the infraspinatus tendon. The hypothesis was that there would be no significant differences between the clinical and radiologic outcome parameters of SCR and PR after a minimum follow-up of 2 years.
Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Of 21 patients who underwent SCR, 20 patients were matched in a 1:1 ratio according to sex, age, and tear configuration with 20 of 60 patients who had undergone PR; all patients were prospectively evaluated for a minimum follow-up of 2 years. The investigated outcome measures included the Constant score; Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score; and radiologic analysis of acromiohumeral distance (AHD) and humeral head centralization (HHC).
There were no differences in the demographic data between the SCR and PR groups. The mean age of both groups was 62.3 years (range, 47-79 years), the mean tear configuration was Bateman 3.0 and Patte 2.8, and the mean follow-up period was 29.4 months (range, 24-53 months). At final follow-up, no significant differences were seen between the SCR and PR groups with regard to Constant score (77.1 vs 82.7), age- and sex-adapted Constant score (85.5% vs 91.4%), DASH score (15.6 vs 7.8), or WORC index (81.1 vs 90.4). No significant differences in the AHD or HHC were seen between the groups. The reoperation rate was 4.8% (1/21) in the SCR cohort and 15% (9/60) in the PR cohort.
Both SCR and PR resulted in significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes at 2-year follow-up, with no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the 2 techniques. Further follow-up is needed to determine whether there are long-term differences in HHC and development of cuff tear arthropathy. Further investigations should also focus on the cost-effectiveness of the respective procedures.
肩胛上盂重建术(SCR)是治疗不可修复的肩袖撕裂的一种新选择。
目的/假设:本研究旨在评估肩胛上盂重建术(SCR)的临床和影像学结果,并将其与冈下肌腱部分修复术(PR)的结果进行比较。假设是在至少2年的随访后,SCR和PR的临床和影像学结果参数之间无显著差异。
队列研究;证据等级,3级。
在接受SCR的21例患者中,根据性别、年龄和撕裂形态以1:1的比例从60例接受PR的患者中匹配出20例;所有患者均进行前瞻性评估,随访至少2年。所调查的结果指标包括Constant评分;西安大略肩袖(WORC)指数;上肢、肩部和手部功能障碍(DASH)评分;以及肩峰下间隙(AHD)和肱骨头中心化(HHC)的影像学分析。
SCR组和PR组的人口统计学数据无差异。两组的平均年龄均为62.3岁(范围47 - 79岁),平均撕裂形态Bateman分级为3.0,Patte分级为2.8,平均随访时间为29.4个月(范围24 - 53个月)。在末次随访时,SCR组和PR组在Constant评分(77.1对82.7)、年龄和性别调整后的Constant评分(85.5%对91.4%)、DASH评分(15.6对7.8)或WORC指数(81.1对90.4)方面均无显著差异。两组之间在AHD或HHC方面也无显著差异。SCR队列的再手术率为4.8%(1/21),PR队列的再手术率为15%(9/60)。
在2年随访时,SCR和PR均使患者报告的结果有显著改善,两种技术的临床结果无显著差异。需要进一步随访以确定HHC和肩袖撕裂性关节病的发展是否存在长期差异。进一步的研究还应关注各自手术的成本效益。