目的：探讨肩关节镜下应用带线锚钉技术同期修复骨性Bankart损伤合并肩袖损伤的手术策略和术后疗效。方法：2008年6月至2015年1月共收治18例同时合并骨性Bankant损伤和肩袖损伤的患者,其中女性8例,男性10例,患者平均年龄57.9岁（40~72...目的：探讨肩关节镜下应用带线锚钉技术同期修复骨性Bankart损伤合并肩袖损伤的手术策略和术后疗效。方法：2008年6月至2015年1月共收治18例同时合并骨性Bankant损伤和肩袖损伤的患者,其中女性8例,男性10例,患者平均年龄57.9岁（40~72岁）。患者均有外伤性肩关节前脱位病史,11例急诊复位后因再脱位就医,7例因存在持续肩关节疼痛就医。18例患者均通过MRI结合X线和三维CT确诊同时存在全层肩袖损伤和骨性Bankart损伤。所有患者均于关节镜下一期修复两种损伤,手术中采用带线锚钉先固定骨性Bankart损伤,再用单排锚钉修复撕裂肩袖。结果：18例患者平均随访时间22.5个月（12~38个月）。术后3月、6月随访肩关节前屈上举和体侧外旋活动度较健侧比较差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。术后1年两侧活动度差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。末次随访时,患侧vs健侧ASES肩关节评分为91.6±6.7分vs 93.6±4.8分,Constant-Murley评分为89.9±6.8分vs 92.0±7.9分,Rowe评分为89.3±7.1 vs 91.1±6.7,两侧比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。末次随访外展肌力双侧无显著性差异,VAS疼痛评分较术前显著改善（1.4±1.1 vs 6.2±1.9）。随访过程中1例患者曾出现半脱位,3例出现术后僵硬,经肌力和功能训练后改善,无感染、再脱位等并发症。结论：肩关节脱位同时存在骨性Bankart损伤和肩袖撕裂时,全关节镜下修复骨性Bankart损伤后再修复肩袖损伤,治疗全面,疗效肯定。展开更多
Lesions of the rotator cuff(RC) are a common occurrence affecting millions of people across all parts of the globe. RC tears are also rampantly prevalent with an agedependent increase in numbers. Other associated fact...Lesions of the rotator cuff(RC) are a common occurrence affecting millions of people across all parts of the globe. RC tears are also rampantly prevalent with an agedependent increase in numbers. Other associated factors include a history of trauma, limb dominance, contralateral shoulder, smoking-status, hypercholesterolemia, posture and occupational dispositions. The challenge lies in early diagnosis since a high proportion of patients are asymptomatic. Pain and decreasing shoulder power and function should alert the heedful practitioner in recognizing promptly the onset or aggravation of existing RC tears. Partial-thickness tears(PTT) can be bursalsided or articular-sided tears. Over the course of time, PTT enlarge and propagate into full-thickness tears(FTT) and develop distinct chronic pathological changes due to muscle retraction, fatty infiltration and muscle atrophy. These lead to a reduction in tendon elasticity and viability. Eventually, the glenohumeral joint experiences a series of degenerative alterations- cuff tear arthropathy. To avert this, a vigilant clinician must utilize and corroborate clinical skill and radiological findings to identify tear progression. Modern radio-diagnostic means of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging provide excellent visualization of structural details and are crucial in determining further course of action for these patients. Physical therapy along with activity modifications, antiinflammatory and analgesic medications form the pillars of nonoperative treatment. Elderly patients with minimal functional demands can be managed conservatively and reassessed at frequent intervals. Regular monitoring helps in isolating patients who require surgical interventions. Early surgery should be considered in younger, active and symptomatic, healthy patients. In addition to being costeffective, this helps in providing a functional shoulder witha stable cuff. An easily reproducible technique of maximal strength and sturdiness should by chosen among the armamentarium of the 展开更多
目的:观察并比较关节镜下改良Mason-Allen与缝线桥缝合治疗中型肩袖撕裂的术后疗效。方法:自2017年1月至2018年1月,采用关节镜下改良Mason-Allen缝合治疗中型肩袖撕裂患者22例,年龄40~81(57.14±10.26)岁;男9例,女13例。2018年2月至...目的:观察并比较关节镜下改良Mason-Allen与缝线桥缝合治疗中型肩袖撕裂的术后疗效。方法:自2017年1月至2018年1月,采用关节镜下改良Mason-Allen缝合治疗中型肩袖撕裂患者22例,年龄40~81(57.14±10.26)岁;男9例,女13例。2018年2月至2019年1月,采用缝线桥缝合治疗中型肩袖撕裂患者20例,年龄42~71(57.75±7.57)岁;男6例,女14例。两组患者的术前及术后临床功能评分采用美国肘关节外科协会(American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons,ASES)评分及Constant评分系统。术后患者肩袖愈合评估采用MRI检查。结果:所有患者获得随访,时间24~33(26.38±2.29)个月。改良Mason-Allen组患者ASES评分和Constant评分由术前的(45.22±7.58)、(58.72±9.26)分提高至术后的(96.89±3.49)、(93.18±3.20)分。缝线桥组患者ASES评分和Constant评分由术前的(47.33±7.50)、(60.05±11.76)分提高至术后的(97.58±3.43)、(93.85±3.15)分。组间术前及术后ASES评分和Constant评分差异均无统计学意义。两组患者术后肩袖愈合情况差异也无统计学意义。结论:关节镜下改良Mason-Allen与缝线桥缝合治疗中型肩袖损伤均可获得较好的临床疗效,且两组缝合技术术后疗效无显著区别。展开更多
文摘目的：探讨肩关节镜下应用带线锚钉技术同期修复骨性Bankart损伤合并肩袖损伤的手术策略和术后疗效。方法：2008年6月至2015年1月共收治18例同时合并骨性Bankant损伤和肩袖损伤的患者,其中女性8例,男性10例,患者平均年龄57.9岁（40~72岁）。患者均有外伤性肩关节前脱位病史,11例急诊复位后因再脱位就医,7例因存在持续肩关节疼痛就医。18例患者均通过MRI结合X线和三维CT确诊同时存在全层肩袖损伤和骨性Bankart损伤。所有患者均于关节镜下一期修复两种损伤,手术中采用带线锚钉先固定骨性Bankart损伤,再用单排锚钉修复撕裂肩袖。结果：18例患者平均随访时间22.5个月（12~38个月）。术后3月、6月随访肩关节前屈上举和体侧外旋活动度较健侧比较差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。术后1年两侧活动度差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。末次随访时,患侧vs健侧ASES肩关节评分为91.6±6.7分vs 93.6±4.8分,Constant-Murley评分为89.9±6.8分vs 92.0±7.9分,Rowe评分为89.3±7.1 vs 91.1±6.7,两侧比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。末次随访外展肌力双侧无显著性差异,VAS疼痛评分较术前显著改善（1.4±1.1 vs 6.2±1.9）。随访过程中1例患者曾出现半脱位,3例出现术后僵硬,经肌力和功能训练后改善,无感染、再脱位等并发症。结论：肩关节脱位同时存在骨性Bankart损伤和肩袖撕裂时,全关节镜下修复骨性Bankart损伤后再修复肩袖损伤,治疗全面,疗效肯定。
文摘Lesions of the rotator cuff(RC) are a common occurrence affecting millions of people across all parts of the globe. RC tears are also rampantly prevalent with an agedependent increase in numbers. Other associated factors include a history of trauma, limb dominance, contralateral shoulder, smoking-status, hypercholesterolemia, posture and occupational dispositions. The challenge lies in early diagnosis since a high proportion of patients are asymptomatic. Pain and decreasing shoulder power and function should alert the heedful practitioner in recognizing promptly the onset or aggravation of existing RC tears. Partial-thickness tears(PTT) can be bursalsided or articular-sided tears. Over the course of time, PTT enlarge and propagate into full-thickness tears(FTT) and develop distinct chronic pathological changes due to muscle retraction, fatty infiltration and muscle atrophy. These lead to a reduction in tendon elasticity and viability. Eventually, the glenohumeral joint experiences a series of degenerative alterations- cuff tear arthropathy. To avert this, a vigilant clinician must utilize and corroborate clinical skill and radiological findings to identify tear progression. Modern radio-diagnostic means of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging provide excellent visualization of structural details and are crucial in determining further course of action for these patients. Physical therapy along with activity modifications, antiinflammatory and analgesic medications form the pillars of nonoperative treatment. Elderly patients with minimal functional demands can be managed conservatively and reassessed at frequent intervals. Regular monitoring helps in isolating patients who require surgical interventions. Early surgery should be considered in younger, active and symptomatic, healthy patients. In addition to being costeffective, this helps in providing a functional shoulder witha stable cuff. An easily reproducible technique of maximal strength and sturdiness should by chosen among the armamentarium of the
文摘目的:观察并比较关节镜下改良Mason-Allen与缝线桥缝合治疗中型肩袖撕裂的术后疗效。方法:自2017年1月至2018年1月,采用关节镜下改良Mason-Allen缝合治疗中型肩袖撕裂患者22例,年龄40~81(57.14±10.26)岁;男9例,女13例。2018年2月至2019年1月,采用缝线桥缝合治疗中型肩袖撕裂患者20例,年龄42~71(57.75±7.57)岁;男6例,女14例。两组患者的术前及术后临床功能评分采用美国肘关节外科协会(American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons,ASES)评分及Constant评分系统。术后患者肩袖愈合评估采用MRI检查。结果:所有患者获得随访,时间24~33(26.38±2.29)个月。改良Mason-Allen组患者ASES评分和Constant评分由术前的(45.22±7.58)、(58.72±9.26)分提高至术后的(96.89±3.49)、(93.18±3.20)分。缝线桥组患者ASES评分和Constant评分由术前的(47.33±7.50)、(60.05±11.76)分提高至术后的(97.58±3.43)、(93.85±3.15)分。组间术前及术后ASES评分和Constant评分差异均无统计学意义。两组患者术后肩袖愈合情况差异也无统计学意义。结论:关节镜下改良Mason-Allen与缝线桥缝合治疗中型肩袖损伤均可获得较好的临床疗效,且两组缝合技术术后疗效无显著区别。
