PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: At present, shoulder arthroscopy is usually used for treatment of rotator cuff injuries. There is still debate over the precise technique of using shoulder arthroscopy to treat partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon injuries.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of the arthroscopic transtendon repair method and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair method in the treatment of patients with Ellman III partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon tears and to analyze the influencing factors of postoperative efficacy.
METHODS: Cohort study; level of evidence,4.
METHODS: A total of 84 partial-thickness rotator cuff tear (PTRCT) patients with Ellman III injuries who underwent surgical treatment in our hospital between January 2017 and January 2020 were selected and divided into the arthroscopic trans-tenon repair group (32 cases) and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair group (52 cases). Shoulder joint pain and functional status were assessed by the Constant score, ASES score and VAS score; shoulder mobility was assessed by measuring shoulder ROM. The clinical outcomes of the two groups of patients were compared, and the factors affecting the postoperative efficacy of the patients were investigated.
RESULTS: All patients were followed up for at least 2 years. The Constant score, ASES score, and VAS score of the two groups of patients were all improved compared with those before surgery, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the Constant score, ASES score, or VAS score between the two groups (P > 0.05). The results of binary logistic regression analysis showed that the preoperative ASES score and whether biceps tenotomy was performed were independent risk factors for satisfactory postoperative efficacy (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with Ellman III partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon tears, the arthroscopic transtendon repair method and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair method can both significantly improve the shoulder pain and function of the patient, but there is no significant difference between the efficacy of the two surgical methods. The preoperative ASES score and whether biceps tenotomy was performed were independent risk factors for satisfactory postoperative efficacy in PTRCT patients with Ellman III injury.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of the arthroscopic transtendon repair method and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair method in the treatment of patients with Ellman III partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon tears and to analyze the influencing factors of postoperative efficacy.
METHODS: Cohort study; level of evidence,4.
METHODS: A total of 84 partial-thickness rotator cuff tear (PTRCT) patients with Ellman III injuries who underwent surgical treatment in our hospital between January 2017 and January 2020 were selected and divided into the arthroscopic trans-tenon repair group (32 cases) and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair group (52 cases). Shoulder joint pain and functional status were assessed by the Constant score, ASES score and VAS score; shoulder mobility was assessed by measuring shoulder ROM. The clinical outcomes of the two groups of patients were compared, and the factors affecting the postoperative efficacy of the patients were investigated.
RESULTS: All patients were followed up for at least 2 years. The Constant score, ASES score, and VAS score of the two groups of patients were all improved compared with those before surgery, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the Constant score, ASES score, or VAS score between the two groups (P > 0.05). The results of binary logistic regression analysis showed that the preoperative ASES score and whether biceps tenotomy was performed were independent risk factors for satisfactory postoperative efficacy (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with Ellman III partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon tears, the arthroscopic transtendon repair method and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair method can both significantly improve the shoulder pain and function of the patient, but there is no significant difference between the efficacy of the two surgical methods. The preoperative ASES score and whether biceps tenotomy was performed were independent risk factors for satisfactory postoperative efficacy in PTRCT patients with Ellman III injury.
摘要：
背景：目前，肩关节镜通常用于治疗肩袖损伤。关于使用肩关节镜治疗部分关节侧冈上肌腱损伤的精确技术仍存在争议。
目的：比较关节镜下横突修补术与关节镜下全层修补术治疗EllmanⅢ型关节侧冈上肌腱部分撕裂患者的临床疗效，并分析术后疗效的影响因素。
方法：队列研究；证据水平，4.
方法：选取2017年1月至2020年1月在我院接受手术治疗的EllmanIII型损伤部分厚度肩袖撕裂(PTRCT)患者84例，分为关节镜下经肌腱修复组(32例)和关节镜下全厚度修复组(52例)。通过Constant评分评估肩关节疼痛和功能状态，ASES评分和VAS评分；通过测量肩部ROM评估肩部活动度。比较两组患者的临床治疗效果,并调查影响患者术后疗效的因素。
结果：所有患者均随访至少2年。常数分数，ASES得分,两组患者的VAS评分均较术前改善,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Constant评分没有显着差异，ASES得分,两组VAS评分比较(P>0.05)。二分类logistic回归分析结果显示,术前ASES评分和是否行肱二头肌均次切开术是影响术后疗效满意的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。
结论：对于EllmanIII部分关节侧冈上肌腱撕裂的患者，关节镜下横断修补术和关节镜下全层修补术均能明显改善患者的肩痛和功能,但两种手术方法的疗效无显著差异。术前ASES评分和是否进行肱二头肌腱切开术是影响PTRCT伴EllmanIII损伤患者术后疗效满意的独立危险因素。
目的：比较关节镜下横突修补术与关节镜下全层修补术治疗EllmanⅢ型关节侧冈上肌腱部分撕裂患者的临床疗效，并分析术后疗效的影响因素。
方法：队列研究；证据水平，4.
方法：选取2017年1月至2020年1月在我院接受手术治疗的EllmanIII型损伤部分厚度肩袖撕裂(PTRCT)患者84例，分为关节镜下经肌腱修复组(32例)和关节镜下全厚度修复组(52例)。通过Constant评分评估肩关节疼痛和功能状态，ASES评分和VAS评分；通过测量肩部ROM评估肩部活动度。比较两组患者的临床治疗效果,并调查影响患者术后疗效的因素。
结果：所有患者均随访至少2年。常数分数，ASES得分,两组患者的VAS评分均较术前改善,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Constant评分没有显着差异，ASES得分,两组VAS评分比较(P>0.05)。二分类logistic回归分析结果显示,术前ASES评分和是否行肱二头肌均次切开术是影响术后疗效满意的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。
结论：对于EllmanIII部分关节侧冈上肌腱撕裂的患者，关节镜下横断修补术和关节镜下全层修补术均能明显改善患者的肩痛和功能,但两种手术方法的疗效无显著差异。术前ASES评分和是否进行肱二头肌腱切开术是影响PTRCT伴EllmanIII损伤患者术后疗效满意的独立危险因素。
