Mostafa Omar E S, Jordan Robert W, Thangarajah Tanujan, MacLean Simon, Woodmass Jarret, D'Alessandro Peter, Malik Shahbaz S
The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, United Kingdom.
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
J Orthop. 2025 Apr 14;63:206-215. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2025.04.003. eCollection 2025 May.
This review aims to explore if the Ream and Run (RnR) technique is associated with better outcomes and lower complications than the traditional Anatomical Total Shoulder Replacement (aTSA) for osteoarthritis.
A systematic search of the literature was conducted using Medline, Embase and Cochrane in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines on March 2, 2024. Only comparative studies of adult patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA) comparing RnR and aTSA were included. Basic demographics, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications were extracted and analysed. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Score (NOS) tool and meta-analysis of outcomes reported by two or more studies was performed using Cochrane RevMan Web.
A total of 1548 patients were pooled from eight studies [RnR 738 vs aTSA 810]. Mean age in the RnR group ranged from 52.8 to 60.3 years with 93.6 % being male, compared with age range of 53-67.5 years in the aTSA group with 56 % being male. Five patients in the RnR group were Walch grade C or D, compared with three patients in the aTSA. No difference was observed between the two groups in post-operative SST score [P < 0.04], post-operative ASES score [P = 0.57] or degree of post-operative forward flexion [P < 0.41]. There was a statistically significant improvement in post-operative degree of external rotation, favouring RnR [MD -8.35, 95 % CI -14.69 to -2.01, P < 0.01] but without a significant clinical importance. The overall rate of complications in the RnR group was 15.4 % and 5.3 % in the aTSA group. The commonest reported complication in RnR group was chronic pain and stiffness (3.9 %) and soft tissue failure in the aTSA group (2.7 %). Overall rate of return-to-theatre was 7 % in RnR and 2.7 % in aTSA group.
Both aTSA and RnR offer improvement in shoulder PROMS. However, the overall re-operation rate and complications appeared high in RnR group. The choice of technique should be tailored to the patient's pre-operative baseline, activity level and desired goals.
本综述旨在探讨与传统解剖型全肩关节置换术(aTSA)相比,Ream和Run(RnR)技术是否能带来更好的治疗效果和更低的并发症发生率,用于治疗骨关节炎。
根据PRISMA指南,于2024年3月2日使用Medline、Embase和Cochrane对文献进行系统检索。仅纳入比较RnR和aTSA治疗成人肩肱关节骨关节炎(OA)患者的对比研究。提取并分析基本人口统计学数据、患者报告结局指标(PROMs)和并发症情况。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)工具进行质量评估,并使用Cochrane RevMan Web对两项或更多研究报告的结局进行荟萃分析。
八项研究共纳入1548例患者[RnR组738例,aTSA组810例]。RnR组的平均年龄在52.8至60.3岁之间,男性占93.6%;而aTSA组的年龄范围为53至67.5岁,男性占56%。RnR组有5例患者为Walch C级或D级,aTSA组有3例。两组在术后SST评分[P < 0.04]、术后ASES评分[P = 0.57]或术后前屈度数[P < 0.41]方面未观察到差异。术后外旋度数有统计学显著改善,RnR组更优[MD -8.35,95%CI -14.69至-2.01,P < 0.01],但无显著临床意义。RnR组的总体并发症发生率为15.4%,aTSA组为5.3%。RnR组报告的最常见并发症是慢性疼痛和僵硬(3.9%),aTSA组是软组织失败(2.7%)。RnR组的总体再次手术率为7%,aTSA组为2.7%。
aTSA和RnR均可改善肩部PROMs。然而,RnR组的总体再次手术率和并发症发生率似乎较高。技术的选择应根据患者术前基线、活动水平和期望目标进行调整。