Suppr超能文献

关节镜下翻修Bankart修复术后的结果:近期文献的最新系统评价

Outcomes After Arthroscopic Revision Bankart Repair: An Updated Systematic Review of Recent Literature.

作者信息

Hong Ian S, Sonnenfeld Julian J, Sicat Chelsea Sue, Hong Robin S, Trofa David P, Schiffern Shadley C, Hamid Nady, Fleischli James E, Saltzman Bryan M

机构信息

OrthoCarolina Sports Medicine Center, Charlotte, North Carolina, U.S.A.; Musculoskeletal Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina, U.S.A.

OrthoCarolina Sports Medicine Center, Charlotte, North Carolina, U.S.A.

出版信息

Arthroscopy. 2023 Feb;39(2):438-451. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2022.03.030. Epub 2022 Apr 7.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To provide an update of recent literature with a specialized focus on clinical outcomes following arthroscopic revision Bankart repair (ARBR) by performing a systematic review of all available literature published between 2013 and 2020.

METHODS

A literature search reporting clinical outcomes after ARBR was performed. Criteria for inclusion consisted of original studies; Level of Evidence of I-IV; studies focusing on clinical outcomes after ARBR published between January 1, 2013, and January 4, 2021; studies reporting recurrent dislocation or instability rate after ARBR; reoperation/revision following ARBR, return to sport rates following ARBR; and patient-reported outcomes. The primary outcomes of interest were failure defined as recurrent instability or dislocation, return to sport rates, and patient-reported outcomes at follow-up.

RESULTS

A large proportion of patients undergoing arthroscopic revision Bankart repair were male, ranging between 67.7% and 93.8%. Failure rate and return to sports rate ranged between 6.1% and 46.8% and 25.9% and 88.3%, respectively, when patients with significant or greater than 20% glenoid bone loss was excluded. Patient-reported outcome scores, which included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, and visual analog scale, saw significant improvement over mean follow-up of ranging 21.64 to 60 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the failure rate and RTS rates after ARBR had a wide range, given the heterogeneity of the studies included, which varied in patient selection criteria pertaining to patients with greater than 20% glenoid bone. Although there have been advancements in arthroscopic techniques and a trend favoring arthroscopic stabilization procedures, there is a lack of consensus in recent literature for careful patient selection criteria that would minimize failure rates and maximize RTS rates after ARBR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, a systematic review of Level III-IV studies.

摘要

目的

通过对2013年至2020年间发表的所有可用文献进行系统评价,提供近期文献的最新情况,特别关注关节镜下改良Bankart修复术(ARBR)后的临床结果。

方法

进行了一项关于ARBR后临床结果的文献检索。纳入标准包括原始研究;证据等级为I-IV级;2013年1月1日至2021年1月4日期间发表的关注ARBR后临床结果的研究;报告ARBR后复发性脱位或不稳定率的研究;ARBR后的再次手术/翻修、ARBR后的恢复运动率;以及患者报告的结果。感兴趣的主要结果是定义为复发性不稳定或脱位的失败、恢复运动率以及随访时患者报告的结果。

结果

接受关节镜下改良Bankart修复术的患者中很大一部分是男性,比例在67.7%至93.8%之间。当排除关节盂骨丢失显著或大于20%的患者时,失败率和恢复运动率分别在6.1%至46.8%和25.9%至88.3%之间。患者报告的结果评分,包括美国肩肘外科医师协会评分、简单肩部测试和视觉模拟量表,在平均21.64至60个月的随访中显著改善。

结论

鉴于纳入研究的异质性,ARBR后的失败率和恢复运动率范围都很广,这些研究在与关节盂骨大于20%的患者相关的患者选择标准方面存在差异。尽管关节镜技术有了进步,且有倾向于关节镜稳定手术的趋势,但近期文献中对于谨慎的患者选择标准缺乏共识,而这些标准可以将ARBR后的失败率降至最低并使恢复运动率最大化。

证据等级

IV级,对III-IV级研究的系统评价。

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