Suppr超能文献

对于临界以下肩胛盂骨丢失≤10%且存在脱轨Hill-Sachs损伤的碰撞和接触性运动员,在进行 remplissage 或开放性Bankart修复加下关节囊移位术后,结果无差异。

No Difference in Outcomes After Remplissage or Open Bankart Repair Plus Inferior Capsular Shift in Collision and Contact Athletes With Subcritical Glenoid Bone Loss ≤10% and Off-Track Hill-Sachs Lesion.

作者信息

Bitar Iván José, Allende Nores Christian, Marangoni Lucas Daniel, Bustos Damian Gabriel, Pezzutti Luciano, Bitar Lucia Belen

机构信息

Sanatorio Allende, Avenida Hipólito Irigoyen 384, Nueva Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina.

Sanatorio Allende, Avenida Hipólito Irigoyen 384, Nueva Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina.

出版信息

Arthroscopy. 2025 Jul;41(7):2271-2279. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.11.097. Epub 2024 Dec 24.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare functional outcomes, recurrence rate, range of motion (ROM), and return to sport between arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage (BR) and open Bankart repair with inferior capsular shift (OBICS) in contact and collision athletes with recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

A prospective comparative cohort study of 90 patients separated into 2 study groups (OBICS and BR) of 45 collision and contact athletes each was conducted. All athletes had subcritical glenoid bone loss ≤10% and off-track Hill-Sach lesions. A minimum follow-up period of 5 years was established. Pre- and postoperative assessments of each group, as well as between them, were carried out. The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scale were used to assess subjective outcomes. Recurrence rate, ROM, and return to sport were evaluated as objective outcomes.

RESULTS

Significant differences were reported in the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index and ASES scores between preoperative and postoperative values in each group. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups (P = .68 and .28). Patient rates achieving the minimal clinically important difference and the patient-acceptable satisfactory state for ASES were 81.2% OBICS, 80% BR, and 78.6% and 76.5%, respectively. Although there was no significant difference between the 2 groups (P = .74), there were 3 dislocations (7.5%) in the OBICS group and 5 (12.5%) in the BR group. No significant differences in ROM were found between the 2 groups. However, significant differences in external rotation were reported in the BR group pre- compared with postoperatively (P = .03 and .04).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no differences between the outcomes of the 2 groups. Depending on surgeon preference, BR or OBICS may be safely indicated in collision or contact athletes with subcritical glenoid bone loss ≤10% and off-track Hill-Sach lesions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prospective comparative study.

摘要

目的

比较关节镜下Bankart修复联合填压术(BR)与开放性Bankart修复联合下关节囊移位术(OBICS)在复发性前肩不稳的接触性和碰撞性运动员中的功能结局、复发率、活动范围(ROM)及重返运动情况。

方法

对90例患者进行前瞻性比较队列研究,分为2个研究组(OBICS组和BR组),每组45例碰撞性和接触性运动员。所有运动员均有临界以下肩胛盂骨丢失≤10%及脱轨型Hill-Sach损伤。确定了至少5年的随访期。对每组术前和术后以及两组之间进行评估。采用西安大略肩不稳指数评分和美国肩肘外科医师(ASES)量表评估主观结局。将复发率、ROM及重返运动情况作为客观结局进行评估。

结果

每组术前和术后的西安大略肩不稳指数及ASES评分均有显著差异。两组之间无显著差异(P = 0.68和0.28)。达到ASES最小临床重要差异及患者可接受满意状态的患者比例,OBICS组为81.2%,BR组为80%,分别为78.6%和76.5%。虽然两组之间无显著差异(P = 0.74),但OBICS组有3例脱位(7.5%),BR组有5例(12.5%)。两组之间在ROM方面未发现显著差异。然而,BR组术前与术后的外旋有显著差异(P = 0.03和0.04)。

结论

我们发现两组的结局无差异。根据外科医生的偏好,对于肩胛盂骨丢失≤10%及脱轨型Hill-Sach损伤的碰撞性或接触性运动员,BR或OBICS均可安全应用。

证据水平

II级,前瞻性比较研究。

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