评估肩袖修复术同时进行锁骨远端切除术对 2 年和 4 年再手术率的影响。

Zachary C Pearson, Amil R Agarwal, Alex Garcia, Jacob Mikula, Marco-Christopher Rupp, Matthew J Best, Uma Srikumaran
{"title":"评估肩袖修复术同时进行锁骨远端切除术对 2 年和 4 年再手术率的影响。","authors":"Zachary C Pearson, Amil R Agarwal, Alex Garcia, Jacob Mikula, Marco-Christopher Rupp, Matthew J Best, Uma Srikumaran","doi":"10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-24-00115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current literature has differing views on the efficacy of concomitant distal claviculectomy (DC) during rotator cuff repair (RCR) in preventing revision surgery. Our aim was to investigate the revision surgery rate between RCR with DC and RCR without DC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using a national claims database. Patients undergoing open or arthroscopic primary RCR with or without concomitant DC were identified. The primary outcome was 4-year revision surgery rates. Univariate analysis was conducted using chi-square or Student t tests. Multivariable analysis was conducted using logistic regression, and an adjusted number needed to harm was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 131,232 patients met inclusion criteria. After logistic regression, patients undergoing RCR with DC had higher odds of requiring a subsequent DC procedure [OR; 95% CI; P-value (1.49; 1.35-1.64; P < 0.001)] but lower odds of any revision surgery (0.87; 0.80-0.91; P < 0.001) within 4 years than those who underwent RCR without DC.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although associated with a lower rate of overall revision surgeries within 2 and 4 years of RCR, those who underwent RCR with DC were 85% more likely at 2 years and 49% more likely at 4 years to undergo revision surgery of the distal clavicle than those without concomitant DC.</p>","PeriodicalId":45062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Global Research and Reviews","volume":"8 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11239165/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Effect of Rotator Cuff Repair With Concomitant Distal Claviculectomy on 2 and 4 Year Reoperation Rates.\",\"authors\":\"Zachary C Pearson, Amil R Agarwal, Alex Garcia, Jacob Mikula, Marco-Christopher Rupp, Matthew J Best, Uma Srikumaran\",\"doi\":\"10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-24-00115\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current literature has differing views on the efficacy of concomitant distal claviculectomy (DC) during rotator cuff repair (RCR) in preventing revision surgery. Our aim was to investigate the revision surgery rate between RCR with DC and RCR without DC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using a national claims database. Patients undergoing open or arthroscopic primary RCR with or without concomitant DC were identified. The primary outcome was 4-year revision surgery rates. Univariate analysis was conducted using chi-square or Student t tests. Multivariable analysis was conducted using logistic regression, and an adjusted number needed to harm was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 131,232 patients met inclusion criteria. After logistic regression, patients undergoing RCR with DC had higher odds of requiring a subsequent DC procedure [OR; 95% CI; P-value (1.49; 1.35-1.64; P < 0.001)] but lower odds of any revision surgery (0.87; 0.80-0.91; P < 0.001) within 4 years than those who underwent RCR without DC.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although associated with a lower rate of overall revision surgeries within 2 and 4 years of RCR, those who underwent RCR with DC were 85% more likely at 2 years and 49% more likely at 4 years to undergo revision surgery of the distal clavicle than those without concomitant DC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45062,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Global Research and Reviews\",\"volume\":\"8 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11239165/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Global Research and Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-24-00115\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Global Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-24-00115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前的文献对肩袖修复术(RCR)中同时进行锁骨远端切除术(DC)以防止翻修手术的效果存在不同看法。我们的目的是调查带锁骨远端切除术的肩袖修复术与不带锁骨远端切除术的肩袖修复术之间的翻修手术率:方法:我们利用一个全国性索赔数据库进行了一项回顾性队列分析。方法:我们利用一个全国性理赔数据库进行了一项回顾性队列分析,确定了接受开刀或关节镜原发性 RCR 的患者是否同时接受了 DC。主要结果是4年翻修手术率。单变量分析采用卡方检验或学生 t 检验。采用逻辑回归法进行多变量分析,并计算出调整后的伤害需要数:共有 131232 名患者符合纳入标准。经过逻辑回归,与接受RCR而不接受DC的患者相比,接受RCR并接受DC的患者在4年内需要进行后续DC手术的几率更高[OR;95% CI;P值(1.49;1.35-1.64;P<0.001)],但接受任何翻修手术的几率较低(0.87;0.80-0.91;P<0.001):结论:虽然RCR术后2年和4年内的总体翻修手术率较低,但与不伴DC的患者相比,伴DC的RCR患者2年内接受锁骨远端翻修手术的几率要高出85%,4年内接受翻修手术的几率要高出49%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evaluating the Effect of Rotator Cuff Repair With Concomitant Distal Claviculectomy on 2 and 4 Year Reoperation Rates.

Background: The current literature has differing views on the efficacy of concomitant distal claviculectomy (DC) during rotator cuff repair (RCR) in preventing revision surgery. Our aim was to investigate the revision surgery rate between RCR with DC and RCR without DC.

Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using a national claims database. Patients undergoing open or arthroscopic primary RCR with or without concomitant DC were identified. The primary outcome was 4-year revision surgery rates. Univariate analysis was conducted using chi-square or Student t tests. Multivariable analysis was conducted using logistic regression, and an adjusted number needed to harm was calculated.

Results: A total of 131,232 patients met inclusion criteria. After logistic regression, patients undergoing RCR with DC had higher odds of requiring a subsequent DC procedure [OR; 95% CI; P-value (1.49; 1.35-1.64; P < 0.001)] but lower odds of any revision surgery (0.87; 0.80-0.91; P < 0.001) within 4 years than those who underwent RCR without DC.

Conclusion: Although associated with a lower rate of overall revision surgeries within 2 and 4 years of RCR, those who underwent RCR with DC were 85% more likely at 2 years and 49% more likely at 4 years to undergo revision surgery of the distal clavicle than those without concomitant DC.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
282
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Congenital Pseudoarthrosis of the Clavicle in a Softball Player. Comments on "Readability Analysis of Patient Education Material on Rotator Cuff Injuries From the Top 25 Ranking Orthopedic Institutions". Is Magnetic Resonance Imaging Overused Among Patients Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty? Sacral U-type Fractures in Patients Older Than 65 years. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Supercapsular Percutaneously Assisted Total Hip Arthroplasty Versus Standard Posterior Approach for Femoral Neck Fracture in Elderly Patients.
×
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