Baek Samuel, Shin Myung Ho, Kim Tae Min, Im Je Min, Oh Kyung-Soo, Chung Seok Won
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul Red Cross Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2021 Sep 9;9(9):23259671211022241. doi: 10.1177/23259671211022241. eCollection 2021 Sep.
Interposition grafting (IG), also called bridging grafting, and superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) are the most commonly used joint-preserving surgical methods for irreparable rotator cuff tears (RCTs).
To compare the effectiveness of IG versus SCR to treat patients with irreparable RCTs.
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
A literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus. Included in this review were clinical studies evaluating the effect of IG or SCR in patients with irreparable RCTs with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Various clinical results from the studies were extracted and compared between IG and SCR, and among them, the results of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, graft retear rate, and complication rate were included in the meta-analysis.
Of 1638 identified articles, 17 (10 studies of IG involving 321 patients and 7 studies of SCR involving 357 patients) were selected. Both surgical methods showed significantly improved clinical outcomes in all but 1 study; however, the IG group had lower pain visual analog scale score, higher Constant score, and bigger active forward flexion and internal rotation compared with the SCR group (all < .001). The meta-analysis showed no difference in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score between groups ( = .44), but showed a significantly lower complication rate in the IG group compared with the SCR group (1.12% vs 8.37%, respectively; < .001). The graft retear rate was not significantly different between groups (IG = 10.64% vs SCR = 12.67%; = .79). The meta-analysis of graft type indicated no difference between groups in retear rate (autograft: 95% CI, 0.045-0.601; = 93.28 [IG], 91.27 [SCR]; = .22; allograft: 95% CI, 0.041-0.216; = 80.39 [IG], 69.12 [SCR]; = .64) or complication rate (autograft: 95% CI, 0.009-0.150; = 0 [IG], 65.89 [SCR]; = .25; allograft: 95% CI, 0.012-0.081; = 0 [IG], 30.62 [SCR]; = .09).
Both IG and SCR techniques resulted in improvement in patients with irreparable RCTs. Meta-analysis showed a lower complication rate in the IG group; however, the lack of randomized studies limited our conclusions.
间置移植(IG),也称为桥接移植,以及上盂唇重建(SCR)是治疗不可修复的肩袖撕裂(RCT)最常用的保关节手术方法。
比较IG与SCR治疗不可修复RCT患者的有效性。
系统评价;证据等级,4级。
在MEDLINE、Embase和Scopus数据库中进行文献检索。本综述纳入了评估IG或SCR对不可修复RCT患者疗效的临床研究,随访时间至少1年。提取研究中的各种临床结果并在IG和SCR之间进行比较,其中,美国肩肘外科医师评分、移植再撕裂率和并发症发生率的结果纳入荟萃分析。
在1638篇检索到的文章中,选择了17篇(10项关于IG的研究,涉及321例患者;7项关于SCR的研究,涉及357例患者)。除1项研究外,两种手术方法均显示临床结果有显著改善;然而,与SCR组相比,IG组的疼痛视觉模拟量表评分更低、Constant评分更高、主动前屈和内旋更大(均P<0.001)。荟萃分析显示两组间美国肩肘外科医师评分无差异(P = 0.44),但IG组的并发症发生率显著低于SCR组(分别为1.12%和8.37%;P<0.001)。两组间移植再撕裂率无显著差异(IG = 10.64%,SCR = 12.67%;P = 0.79)。移植类型的荟萃分析表明,两组间再撕裂率(自体移植:95%CI,0.045 - 0.601;P = 93.28[IG],91.27[SCR];P = 0.22;同种异体移植:95%CI,0.041 - 0.216;P = 80.39[IG],69.12[SCR];P = 0.64)或并发症发生率(自体移植:95%CI,0.009 - 0.150;P = 0[IG],65.89[SCR];P = 0.25;同种异体移植:95%CI,0.012 - 0.081;P = 0[IG],30.62[SCR];P = 0.09)无差异。
IG和SCR技术均使不可修复RCT患者的病情得到改善。荟萃分析显示IG组并发症发生率较低;然而,缺乏随机研究限制了我们的结论。