Suppr超能文献

关节镜下Latarjet手术与关节镜下骨性Bankart修复术相比,在复发性前肩关节不稳的治疗中能获得更好的愈合及预防不稳:一项系统评价

Arthroscopic Latarjet yields better union and prevention of instability compared to arthroscopic bony Bankart repair in shoulders with recurrent anterior instability: a systematic review.

作者信息

Billaud Anselme, Baverel Laurent, Metais Pierre

机构信息

Clinique du Sport, 2 rue Georges Negrevergne, 33700, Mérignac, France.

ELSAN, Clinique Breteche, Nantes, France.

出版信息

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023 Dec;31(12):5994-6005. doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07655-x. Epub 2023 Nov 18.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To determine whether arthroscopic Latarjet procedure or arthroscopic bony Bankart repair provide better outcomes in terms of rates of recurrent instability, non-union and complications, as well as clinical scores and range of motion.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase®, and Cochrane databases, applying the following keywords: "Arthroscopic bony Bankart" OR "Arthroscopic osseous Bankart" AND "Arthroscopic Latarjet" OR "Arthroscopic coracoid bone block".

RESULTS

The systematic search returned 1465 records, of which 29 were included (arthroscopic bony Bankart repair, n = 16; arthroscopic Latarjet, n = 13). 37 datasets were included for data extraction, on 1483 shoulders. Compared to arthroscopic Latarjet, arthroscopic bony Bankart repair had significantly higher instability rates (0.14; CI 0.10-0.18; vs 0.04; CI 0.02-0.06), significantly lower union rates (0.63; CI 0.28-0.91 vs 0.98; CI 0.93-1.00), and significantly lower pain on VAS (0.42; CI 0.17-0.67 vs 1.17; CI 0.96-1.38). There were no significant differences in preoperative glenoid bone loss, follow-up, complication rate, ROWE score, ASES score, external rotation, and anterior forward elevation between arthroscopic Latarjet and arthroscopic bony Bankart repair.

CONCLUSION

Compared to arthroscopic Latarjet, arthroscopic bony Bankart repair results in significantly (i) higher rates of recurrent instability (14% vs 4%), (ii) lower union rates (63% vs 98%), but (iii) slightly lower pain on VAS (0.45 vs 1.17). There were no differences in complication rates, clinical scores, or postoperative ranges of motion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

摘要

目的

确定关节镜下Latarjet手术或关节镜下骨性Bankart修复术在复发性不稳定率、骨不连和并发症发生率以及临床评分和活动范围方面是否能提供更好的结果。

方法

使用PubMed、Embase®和Cochrane数据库进行电子文献检索,应用以下关键词:“关节镜下骨性Bankart”或“关节镜下骨性Bankart修复”以及“关节镜下Latarjet手术”或“关节镜下喙突骨块移植”。

结果

系统检索返回1465条记录,其中29条被纳入(关节镜下骨性Bankart修复,n = 16;关节镜下Latarjet手术,n = 13)。纳入37个数据集进行数据提取,涉及1483个肩关节。与关节镜下Latarjet手术相比,关节镜下骨性Bankart修复术的不稳定率显著更高(0.14;95%置信区间0.10 - 0.18;对比0.04;95%置信区间0.02 - 0.06),骨愈合率显著更低(0.63;95%置信区间0.28 - 0.91对比0.98;95%置信区间0.93 - 1.00),视觉模拟评分法(VAS)疼痛评分显著更低(0.42;95%置信区间0.17 - 0.67对比1.17;95%置信区间0.96 - 1.38)。关节镜下Latarjet手术和关节镜下骨性Bankart修复术在术前肩胛盂骨丢失、随访、并发症发生率、ROWE评分、ASES评分、外旋以及前向抬高方面无显著差异。

结论

与关节镜下Latarjet手术相比,关节镜下骨性Bankart修复术导致(i)复发性不稳定率显著更高(14%对比4%),(ii)骨愈合率显著更低(63%对比98%),但(iii)VAS疼痛评分略低(0.45对比1.17)。并发症发生率、临床评分或术后活动范围无差异。

证据级别

IV级。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验