Oregon Shoulder Institute, Medford, Oregon, U.S.A.
Department of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Midwest Orthopedics at Rush, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy. 2022 Oct;38(10):2798-2805. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2022.03.031. Epub 2022 Apr 8.
The purpose of this study was to compare functional outcome, return to sport, satisfaction, postoperative recurrence, and complications in patients undergoing primary arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage (ABR) to primary Latarjet.
A multicenter retrospective study was performed on patients undergoing primary ABR or open Latarjet between 2013 and 2019 who had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Baseline and two-year range of motion (ROM), patient-reported outcomes (PROs: Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index [WOSI], Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation [SANE], and visual analog scale [VAS] for pain) recurrence, return to sport, satisfaction, and complications were reviewed.
This study included 258 patients, including 70 ABRs and 188 Latarjet procedures. Baseline demographics, ROM, and PROs were similar. Mean preop glenoid bone loss (GBL) (12.3% ± 10.9% vs 7.6% ± 9%; P < .001) and off-track lesions (23% vs 13%; P = .046) were higher in the ABR group, while preoperative GBL range was similar (0-42% vs 0-47%). Changes in the VAS (1.9 vs 0.9; P = .019) and WOSI (1096 vs 805; P < .001) were improved in ABR. The percentage of patients who achieved a minimal clinically important difference was improved in WOSI for ABR and PASS for ABR in SANE, VAS, and WOSI scores. The ABR cohort reported worse changes in external rotation (ER) (-4° vs +19°; P < .001). Return to sport among overhead and contact athletes favored ABR (91.5% vs 72.7%; P = .007). Satisfaction and recurrent dislocation were similar. Surgical complications were observed in 0% of ABR cases, compared to 5.9% in the Latarjet group.
Primary ABR resulted in 2-year functional outcomes that were as good or superior to primary Latarjet, with higher return to sport for overhead and contact activities, fewer complications, and comparably low recurrence rates, even despite greater bipolar bone loss in the ABR cohort. However, this comes at the expense of decreased external rotation, which may be considered in individual patients.
III, retrospective comparative study.
本研究旨在比较初次关节镜下 Bankart 修复加填充术(ABR)与初次 Latarjet 术治疗初次肩关节前脱位患者的功能结果、重返运动、满意度、术后复发和并发症。
对 2013 年至 2019 年间行初次 ABR 或开放 Latarjet 术且随访至少 2 年的患者进行多中心回顾性研究。回顾分析基线和 2 年时的活动范围(ROM)、患者报告的结果(PROs:Western Ontario 肩不稳定指数[WOSI]、单项评估数值评估[SANE]和疼痛视觉模拟评分[VAS])、复发、重返运动、满意度和并发症。
本研究纳入了 258 例患者,其中 70 例行 ABR,188 例行 Latarjet 术。两组基线人口统计学资料、ROM 和 PROs 相似。ABR 组术前盂肱骨骨丢失(GBL)(12.3%±10.9%比 7.6%±9%;P<.001)和关节盂脱位(23%比 13%;P=0.046)较高,而术前 GBL 范围相似(0-42%比 0-47%)。ABR 组的 VAS(1.9 比 0.9;P=0.019)和 WOSI(1096 比 805;P<.001)改善更明显。ABR 组在 WOSI 中达到最小临床重要差异的患者比例增加,在 SANE、VAS 和 WOSI 评分中,ABR 组在 PASS 中达到最小临床重要差异的患者比例增加。ABR 组的外旋(ER)改善(-4°比+19°;P<.001)更差。ABR 组在投掷和接触性运动员中重返运动的比例更高(91.5%比 72.7%;P=0.007)。满意度和复发性脱位相似。ABR 组的手术并发症发生率为 0%,而 Latarjet 组为 5.9%。
初次 ABR 术后 2 年的功能结果与初次 Latarjet 术一样好或更好,对于投掷和接触性运动的患者,重返运动的比例更高,并发症更少,复发率也更低,尽管 ABR 组的双极骨丢失更大。然而,这是以牺牲外旋为代价的,这可能需要在个别患者中进行考虑。
III 级,回顾性比较研究。