PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: The margin convergence (MC) technique is used to repair longitudinal-type tears as direct repair of the apex of the longitudinal-type tear from medial to lateral is challenging. Few studies have compared the postoperative clinical outcomes and retear rates of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) using the MC technique with those of conventional ARCR without using the MC technique. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the efficacy of MC on the clinical outcome and retear rates of patients with large-sized rotator cuff tears. It was hypothesized that ARCR using the MC technique would yield clinical outcome and retear rates similar to those of ARCR without using the MC technique.
UNASSIGNED: The medical records of consecutive patients who underwent ARCR for large-sized rotator cuff tears were retrospectively evaluated. Forty-four and 35 shoulders were repaired using MC (MC group) and not using MC (non-MC group), respectively. The range of motion (ROM) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score were assessed preoperatively and after a minimum follow-up period of 12 months postoperatively. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed at least 3 months postoperatively to determine whether the tendons had healed.
UNASSIGNED: The average postoperative follow-up duration was 26.6 months and 24.3 months in the MC and non-MC groups, respectively. The mean ROM and JOA score improved significantly in both groups postoperatively; however, the postoperative range of external rotation and the total JOA score was significantly lower in the MC group. The overall retear rate did not differ significantly between the MC (13/44, 29.5%) and non-MC (7/35, 20.0%) groups, respectively (P = .332). No significant differences were observed between the cases with retears in the 2 groups in terms of the postoperative ROM and the total JOA score. In contrast, the postoperative range of external rotation and the total JOA score of the patients with healed tendons in the MC group were significantly poorer than those of the patients with healed tendons in the non-MC group.
UNASSIGNED: ARCR using MC of large-sized longitudinal-type tears does not lead to better postoperative range of external rotation and clinical outcome compared with those of conventional repair.
UNASSIGNED: The medical records of consecutive patients who underwent ARCR for large-sized rotator cuff tears were retrospectively evaluated. Forty-four and 35 shoulders were repaired using MC (MC group) and not using MC (non-MC group), respectively. The range of motion (ROM) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score were assessed preoperatively and after a minimum follow-up period of 12 months postoperatively. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed at least 3 months postoperatively to determine whether the tendons had healed.
UNASSIGNED: The average postoperative follow-up duration was 26.6 months and 24.3 months in the MC and non-MC groups, respectively. The mean ROM and JOA score improved significantly in both groups postoperatively; however, the postoperative range of external rotation and the total JOA score was significantly lower in the MC group. The overall retear rate did not differ significantly between the MC (13/44, 29.5%) and non-MC (7/35, 20.0%) groups, respectively (P = .332). No significant differences were observed between the cases with retears in the 2 groups in terms of the postoperative ROM and the total JOA score. In contrast, the postoperative range of external rotation and the total JOA score of the patients with healed tendons in the MC group were significantly poorer than those of the patients with healed tendons in the non-MC group.
UNASSIGNED: ARCR using MC of large-sized longitudinal-type tears does not lead to better postoperative range of external rotation and clinical outcome compared with those of conventional repair.
摘要：
■边缘会聚（MC）技术用于修复纵向型撕裂，因为从内侧到外侧直接修复纵向型撕裂的顶点具有挑战性。很少有研究比较使用MC技术的关节镜肩袖修复（ARCR）与不使用MC技术的常规ARCR的术后临床结果和再撕裂率。因此,本研究旨在探讨MC对大型肩袖撕裂患者的临床结局和再撕裂率的影响.假设使用MC技术的ARCR将产生与不使用MC技术的ARCR相似的临床结果和再撕裂率。
■回顾性评估连续接受ARCR治疗的大型肩袖撕裂患者的病历。使用MC（MC组）和未使用MC（非MC组）修复了44和35个肩膀，分别。术前和术后12个月的最小随访期后，评估了活动范围（ROM）和日本骨科协会（JOA）评分。术后至少3个月进行磁共振成像，以确定肌腱是否已愈合。
■MC组和非MC组术后平均随访时间分别为26.6个月和24.3个月,分别。术后两组患者的平均ROM和JOA评分均显著改善；然而，MC组术后外旋范围和总JOA评分明显降低.MC组(13/44,29.5%)和非MC组(7/35,20.0%)的总再撕率无显著差异,分别（P=.332）。两组患者术后ROM和总JOA评分无明显差异。相比之下,MC组肌腱愈合患者的术后外旋范围和总JOA评分明显低于非MC组肌腱愈合患者.
■使用大尺寸纵向型泪液MC的ARCR与常规修复相比，不会导致更好的术后外旋范围和临床结果。
■回顾性评估连续接受ARCR治疗的大型肩袖撕裂患者的病历。使用MC（MC组）和未使用MC（非MC组）修复了44和35个肩膀，分别。术前和术后12个月的最小随访期后，评估了活动范围（ROM）和日本骨科协会（JOA）评分。术后至少3个月进行磁共振成像，以确定肌腱是否已愈合。
■MC组和非MC组术后平均随访时间分别为26.6个月和24.3个月,分别。术后两组患者的平均ROM和JOA评分均显著改善；然而，MC组术后外旋范围和总JOA评分明显降低.MC组(13/44,29.5%)和非MC组(7/35,20.0%)的总再撕率无显著差异,分别（P=.332）。两组患者术后ROM和总JOA评分无明显差异。相比之下,MC组肌腱愈合患者的术后外旋范围和总JOA评分明显低于非MC组肌腱愈合患者.
■使用大尺寸纵向型泪液MC的ARCR与常规修复相比，不会导致更好的术后外旋范围和临床结果。
