Favorable Outcomes Following Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction and Repair, Though Repair Associated with Increased Risk of Revision Surgery.

Nathan H Varady, Suhas Parise, Kyle N Kunze, Christopher M Brusalis, Riley J Williams, David W Altchek, Joshua S Dines
{"title":"Favorable Outcomes Following Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction and Repair, Though Repair Associated with Increased Risk of Revision Surgery.","authors":"Nathan H Varady, Suhas Parise, Kyle N Kunze, Christopher M Brusalis, Riley J Williams, David W Altchek, Joshua S Dines","doi":"10.1016/j.arthro.2024.10.049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the risk of revision surgery following repair versus reconstruction of the medial ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) of the elbow in a national sample of patients in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective cohort study of young patients (≤35 years old) who underwent primary UCL reconstruction or repair for an isolated medial UCL injury of the elbow from October 2015 through October 2022 in a large national database (PearlDiver). Patient demographic data, comorbidities, surgical details, and concomitant ulnar nerve procedures were collected. Time-to-event analyses were used to assess the risk of revision UCL surgery between groups. Two-year complication rates, including ulnar neuropathy, were also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 1,820 patients (69.9% reconstruction, 30.1% repair) with an average follow-up of 2.9 years met inclusion criteria. The estimated 2-year revision-free survival (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 99.5% (99.1%-99.9%) for UCL reconstruction compared to 97.9% (96.4%-99.3%) for UCL repair (unadjusted Log-rank p=0.032). UCL repair remained associated with an increased risk of revision UCL surgery after adjusting for confounding variables (hazard ratio 2.94, 95% CI 1.07-8.09, p=0.037). Complication rates were similar between reconstruction and repair, including the incidence of ulnar neuropathy (13.8% vs. 14.5%, p=0.78).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, we found that UCL repair was associated with a significantly higher risk of revision UCL surgery than UCL reconstruction in a national sample. Importantly, however, overall failure rates were low and complication rates were similar between procedures. These findings support the overall favorable outcomes of UCL repair, while suggesting it may not necessarily be the optimal treatment for all patients.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3 - retrospective cohort study.</p>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2024.10.049","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the risk of revision surgery following repair versus reconstruction of the medial ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) of the elbow in a national sample of patients in the United States.

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of young patients (≤35 years old) who underwent primary UCL reconstruction or repair for an isolated medial UCL injury of the elbow from October 2015 through October 2022 in a large national database (PearlDiver). Patient demographic data, comorbidities, surgical details, and concomitant ulnar nerve procedures were collected. Time-to-event analyses were used to assess the risk of revision UCL surgery between groups. Two-year complication rates, including ulnar neuropathy, were also assessed.

Results: In total, 1,820 patients (69.9% reconstruction, 30.1% repair) with an average follow-up of 2.9 years met inclusion criteria. The estimated 2-year revision-free survival (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 99.5% (99.1%-99.9%) for UCL reconstruction compared to 97.9% (96.4%-99.3%) for UCL repair (unadjusted Log-rank p=0.032). UCL repair remained associated with an increased risk of revision UCL surgery after adjusting for confounding variables (hazard ratio 2.94, 95% CI 1.07-8.09, p=0.037). Complication rates were similar between reconstruction and repair, including the incidence of ulnar neuropathy (13.8% vs. 14.5%, p=0.78).

Conclusion: In this study, we found that UCL repair was associated with a significantly higher risk of revision UCL surgery than UCL reconstruction in a national sample. Importantly, however, overall failure rates were low and complication rates were similar between procedures. These findings support the overall favorable outcomes of UCL repair, while suggesting it may not necessarily be the optimal treatment for all patients.

Level of evidence: 3 - retrospective cohort study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肘关节尺侧副韧带重建和修复术后效果良好,但修复术后复发风险增加
目的:在美国全国样本患者中评估肘部内侧尺侧韧带(UCL)修复与重建后进行翻修手术的风险:这是一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象是2015年10月至2022年10月期间在大型国家数据库(PearlDiver)中因孤立的肘部内侧尺侧韧带损伤而接受初级UCL重建或修复手术的年轻患者(≤35岁)。该数据库收集了患者的人口统计学数据、合并症、手术细节以及同时进行的尺神经手术。采用时间到事件分析法来评估不同组间进行 UCL 手术的风险。同时还评估了两年的并发症发生率,包括尺神经病变:共有1820名患者(69.9%为重建,30.1%为修复)符合纳入标准,平均随访时间为2.9年。UCL重建术的估计2年无翻修生存率(95%置信区间[CI])为99.5%(99.1%-99.9%),而UCL修复术的估计2年无翻修生存率为97.9%(96.4%-99.3%)(未经调整的Log-rank p=0.032)。调整混杂变量后,UCL修复术仍与UCL翻修手术风险增加有关(危险比2.94,95% CI 1.07-8.09,p=0.037)。重建与修复的并发症发生率相似,包括尺神经病变的发生率(13.8% vs. 14.5%,p=0.78):在这项研究中,我们发现在全国样本中,UCL修复术与UCL翻修手术相关的风险明显高于UCL重建术。但重要的是,不同手术的总体失败率较低,并发症发生率相似。这些发现支持了UCL修复术的总体良好结果,同时也表明它不一定是所有患者的最佳治疗方法:3--回顾性队列研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
17.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Nowhere is minimally invasive surgery explained better than in Arthroscopy, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field. Every issue enables you to put into perspective the usefulness of the various emerging arthroscopic techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods -- along with their applications in various situations -- are discussed in relation to their efficiency, efficacy and cost benefit. As a special incentive, paid subscribers also receive access to the journal expanded website.
期刊最新文献
Letter Regarding "Adding Dexmedetomidine to Intra-Articular Local Anesthetics Results in Prolonged Analgesia After Knee Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis" - Authors' Reply. Most Athletes who fail to Return to Sport After Latarjet Procedure Cite Psychological Factors: a Systematic Review. Author Reply to Letter to the Editor "Comments on the Article 'Anterior Opening-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy in the Setting of Genu Recurvatum'". Comments on the article "Technical Note: Anterior opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy in the setting of genu recurvatum" published in Arthroscopy Techniques 2023, 12(11): e1559 - e1566. Editorial Commentary: Anatomic Tibiofibular and Partially Anatomic-Based Fibular Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction Techniques Are Biomechanically Superior to Non-Anatomic Reconstruction Techniques: A Tibial Tunnel is the Gold Standard for An Anatomic Reconstruction.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1