影响肩袖修复愈合的因素:大结节微骨折。

IF 1.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.5397/cise.2024.00290
Gwan Kyu Son, Myung Seo Kim
{"title":"影响肩袖修复愈合的因素:大结节微骨折。","authors":"Gwan Kyu Son, Myung Seo Kim","doi":"10.5397/cise.2024.00290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the impact of microfractures generated within the footprint of the greater tuberosity (GT) on postoperative cuff healing following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent ARCR for full-thickness rotator cuff tear (FTRCT) between April 2020 and October 2023 at our institution. A total of 73 patients was categorized into two groups based on the presence of microfractures: a microfracture group (group M, n=33) and a non-microfracture group (group N, n=40). Six months post-surgery, magnetic resonance imaging was performed to assess cuff healing and retear rates between the two groups. Furthermore, patients were stratified into retear and healing groups based on cuff integrity to analyze the factors influencing retear. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the associations between various demographic data (e.g., age) and radiologic parameters (tear size mediolateral [ML], anteroposterior [AP], and fatty infiltration [FI] of the rotator cuff muscle), including microfracture, with retear.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in retear rates between groups M and N (18.2% vs. 10.0%, P=0.332). Among demographic factors, age showed a significant difference between the retear and healing groups (67.4±8.5 vs. 61.6±6.1, P=0.044). ML tear size (3.1±1.7 vs. 2.0±1.1, P=0.015), AP tear size (2.4±1.2 vs. 1.6±1.0, P=0.332), FI of the supraspinatus (2.3±1.3 vs. 1.4±1.0, P=0.029), and FI of the infraspinatus (1.6±1.3 vs. 0.9±0.8, P=0.015) exhibited significant differences between the retear and healing groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified age (odds ratio [OR], 1.153; 95% CI, 1.026-1.295; P=0.016) and tear size (OR, 1.988; 95% CI, 1.103-3.582; P=0.022) as independent risk factors for retear.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ARCR with concurrent microfracture of the GT footprint did not significantly impact cuff healing in patients with FTRCT. However, older age and larger ML tear size were associated with an increased risk of retear. Level of evidence: III.</p>","PeriodicalId":33981,"journal":{"name":"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors affecting healing of rotator cuff repairs: microfracture of the greater tuberosity.\",\"authors\":\"Gwan Kyu Son, Myung Seo Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.5397/cise.2024.00290\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the impact of microfractures generated within the footprint of the greater tuberosity (GT) on postoperative cuff healing following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent ARCR for full-thickness rotator cuff tear (FTRCT) between April 2020 and October 2023 at our institution. A total of 73 patients was categorized into two groups based on the presence of microfractures: a microfracture group (group M, n=33) and a non-microfracture group (group N, n=40). Six months post-surgery, magnetic resonance imaging was performed to assess cuff healing and retear rates between the two groups. Furthermore, patients were stratified into retear and healing groups based on cuff integrity to analyze the factors influencing retear. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the associations between various demographic data (e.g., age) and radiologic parameters (tear size mediolateral [ML], anteroposterior [AP], and fatty infiltration [FI] of the rotator cuff muscle), including microfracture, with retear.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in retear rates between groups M and N (18.2% vs. 10.0%, P=0.332). Among demographic factors, age showed a significant difference between the retear and healing groups (67.4±8.5 vs. 61.6±6.1, P=0.044). ML tear size (3.1±1.7 vs. 2.0±1.1, P=0.015), AP tear size (2.4±1.2 vs. 1.6±1.0, P=0.332), FI of the supraspinatus (2.3±1.3 vs. 1.4±1.0, P=0.029), and FI of the infraspinatus (1.6±1.3 vs. 0.9±0.8, P=0.015) exhibited significant differences between the retear and healing groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified age (odds ratio [OR], 1.153; 95% CI, 1.026-1.295; P=0.016) and tear size (OR, 1.988; 95% CI, 1.103-3.582; P=0.022) as independent risk factors for retear.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ARCR with concurrent microfracture of the GT footprint did not significantly impact cuff healing in patients with FTRCT. However, older age and larger ML tear size were associated with an increased risk of retear. Level of evidence: III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":33981,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5397/cise.2024.00290\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5397/cise.2024.00290","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在探讨大结节(GT)足底内产生的微骨折对关节镜下肩袖修复术(ARCR)术后肩袖愈合的影响:本院对2020年4月至2023年10月期间因全厚肩袖撕裂(FTRCT)接受关节镜下肩袖修复术(ARCR)的患者进行了回顾性分析。根据是否存在微骨折,73 名患者被分为两组:微骨折组(M 组,人数=33)和非微骨折组(N 组,人数=40)。手术后六个月,进行磁共振成像,以评估两组患者的袖带愈合情况和再撕裂率。此外,根据袖带完整性将患者分为再撕裂组和愈合组,以分析影响再撕裂的因素。统计分析评估了各种人口统计学数据(如年龄)和放射学参数(撕裂大小内外侧[ML]、前后[AP]和肩袖肌脂肪浸润[FI])(包括微骨折)与再撕裂之间的关联:M组和N组的再撕裂率无明显差异(18.2% vs. 10.0%,P=0.332)。在人口统计学因素中,年龄在再撕裂组和愈合组之间有显著差异(67.4±8.5 vs. 61.6±6.1,P=0.044)。ML撕裂大小(3.1±1.7 vs. 2.0±1.1,P=0.015)、AP撕裂大小(2.4±1.2 vs. 1.6±1.0,P=0.332)、冈上肌FI(2.3±1.3 vs. 1.4±1.0,P=0.029)和冈下肌FI(1.6±1.3 vs. 0.9±0.8,P=0.015)在再撕裂组和愈合组之间存在显著差异。多变量逻辑回归分析确定年龄(几率比[OR],1.153;95% CI,1.026-1.295;P=0.016)和撕裂大小(OR,1.988;95% CI,1.103-3.582;P=0.022)为再撕裂的独立风险因素:结论:ARCR同时进行GT足底微骨折不会对FTRCT患者的袖带愈合产生明显影响。然而,年龄越大、ML撕裂面积越大,发生再撕裂的风险就越高。证据等级:III级。
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
Factors affecting healing of rotator cuff repairs: microfracture of the greater tuberosity.

Background: This study aimed to investigate the impact of microfractures generated within the footprint of the greater tuberosity (GT) on postoperative cuff healing following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR).

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent ARCR for full-thickness rotator cuff tear (FTRCT) between April 2020 and October 2023 at our institution. A total of 73 patients was categorized into two groups based on the presence of microfractures: a microfracture group (group M, n=33) and a non-microfracture group (group N, n=40). Six months post-surgery, magnetic resonance imaging was performed to assess cuff healing and retear rates between the two groups. Furthermore, patients were stratified into retear and healing groups based on cuff integrity to analyze the factors influencing retear. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the associations between various demographic data (e.g., age) and radiologic parameters (tear size mediolateral [ML], anteroposterior [AP], and fatty infiltration [FI] of the rotator cuff muscle), including microfracture, with retear.

Results: There was no significant difference in retear rates between groups M and N (18.2% vs. 10.0%, P=0.332). Among demographic factors, age showed a significant difference between the retear and healing groups (67.4±8.5 vs. 61.6±6.1, P=0.044). ML tear size (3.1±1.7 vs. 2.0±1.1, P=0.015), AP tear size (2.4±1.2 vs. 1.6±1.0, P=0.332), FI of the supraspinatus (2.3±1.3 vs. 1.4±1.0, P=0.029), and FI of the infraspinatus (1.6±1.3 vs. 0.9±0.8, P=0.015) exhibited significant differences between the retear and healing groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified age (odds ratio [OR], 1.153; 95% CI, 1.026-1.295; P=0.016) and tear size (OR, 1.988; 95% CI, 1.103-3.582; P=0.022) as independent risk factors for retear.

Conclusions: ARCR with concurrent microfracture of the GT footprint did not significantly impact cuff healing in patients with FTRCT. However, older age and larger ML tear size were associated with an increased risk of retear. Level of evidence: III.

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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Descriptive analysis of total elbow arthroplasty for distal humerus fractures: 30-day complications. Learning curve for the open Latarjet procedure: a single-surgeon study. Outcomes of lateralized reverse total shoulder arthroplasty versus latissimus dorsi transfer for external rotation deficit: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reconsidering the clinical outcomes of the stemless reverse total shoulder arthroplasty design implant. The impact of supraspinatus tear on subscapularis muscle atrophy and fatty infiltration.
×
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