Sgroi Mirco, Kranz Marilena, Seitz Andreas Martin, Ludwig Marius, Faschingbauer Martin, Zippelius Timo, Reichel Heiko, Kappe Thomas
Department for Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Ulm, RKU, Ulm, Germany.
Institute of Orthopaedic Research and Biomechanics, Centre for Trauma Research Ulm, Ulm University Medical Centre, Ulm, Germany.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2022 Mar 15;10(3):23259671221083591. doi: 10.1177/23259671221083591. eCollection 2022 Mar.
Both knotted and knotless single-anchor repair techniques are used to repair transmural ruptures of the upper subscapularis (SSC) tendon. However, it is still unclear which technique provides better clinical and radiological results.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To compare the clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes of knotless and knotted single-anchor repair techniques in patients with a transmural rupture of the upper SSC tendon at 2-year follow-up. It was hypothesized that the 2 techniques would not differ significantly in outcomes.
Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Forty patients with a transmural tear of the upper SSC tendon (grade 2 or 3 according to Fox and Romeo) were retrospectively enrolled. Depending on the repair technique, patients were assigned to either the knotless single-anchor or knotted single-anchor group. After a mean follow-up of 2.33 ± 0.43 years, patients were assessed by the ASES, WORC, OSS, CS, and SSV. A clinical examination that included the bear-hug, the lift-off, and the belly-press tests was performed, in which the force exerted by the subjects was measured. In addition, all patients underwent MRI of the affected shoulder to assess repair integrity, tendon width, fatty infiltration, signal-to-signal ratio of the upper and lower SSC muscle, and atrophy of the SSC muscle.
No significant difference was found between the 2 groups on any of the clinical scores [ASES ( = .272), WORC ( = .523), OSS ( = .401), CS ( = .328), SSV ( = .540)] or on the range-of-motion or force measurements. Apart from a higher signal-to-signal ratio of the lower SSC muscle in the knotless group ( = .017), no significant difference on imaging outcomes was found between the 2 groups.
Both techniques can be used in surgical practice, as neither was found to be superior to the other in terms of clinical or imaging outcomes at 2-year follow-up.
带结和无结单锚修复技术均用于修复肩胛下肌(SSC)肌腱上半部分的全层撕裂。然而,目前仍不清楚哪种技术能提供更好的临床和影像学效果。
目的/假设:比较无结和带结单锚修复技术在SSC肌腱上半部分全层撕裂患者2年随访时的临床和磁共振成像(MRI)结果。假设两种技术在结果上无显著差异。
队列研究;证据等级,3级。
回顾性纳入40例SSC肌腱上半部分全层撕裂患者(根据Fox和Romeo分级为2级或3级)。根据修复技术,患者被分为无结单锚组或带结单锚组。平均随访2.33±0.43年后,采用ASES、WORC、OSS、CS和SSV对患者进行评估。进行了包括抱熊试验、抬离试验和压腹试验在内的临床检查,测量受试者施加的力量。此外,所有患者均接受患侧肩部的MRI检查,以评估修复完整性、肌腱宽度、脂肪浸润、SSC上下部肌肉的信号比以及SSC肌肉萎缩情况。
两组在任何临床评分[ASES(=0.272)、WORC(=0.523)、OSS(=0.401)、CS(=0.328)、SSV(=0.540)]、活动范围或力量测量方面均未发现显著差异。除无结组SSC下部肌肉的信号比更高(=0.017)外,两组在影像学结果上未发现显著差异。
两种技术均可用于手术实践,因为在2年随访时,在临床或影像学结果方面均未发现一种技术优于另一种技术。