[1]李叶嘉,黄伟韬,李沛兴.mLSRS与双排线桥缝合术治疗大范围肩袖损伤患者的早期效果比较[J].医学信息,2022,35(06):123-125.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.06.030]
　LI Ye-jia,HUANG Wei-tao,LI Pei-xing.Comparison of Early Effect on Modified Load-sharing Rip-stop Repair and Suture-bridge Repair in the Treatment of Patients with Large Rotator Cuff TearsLI Ye-jia,HUANG Wei-tao,LI Pei-xing[J].Medical Information,2022,35(06):123-125.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.06.030]
点击复制

mLSRS与双排线桥缝合术治疗大范围肩袖损伤患者的早期效果比较()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
35卷
期数:
2022年06期
页码:
123-125
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2022-03-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparison of Early Effect on Modified Load-sharing Rip-stop Repair and Suture-bridge Repair in the Treatment of Patients with Large Rotator Cuff TearsLI Ye-jia,HUANG Wei-tao,LI Pei-xing
文章编号:
1006-1959（2022）06-0123-03
作者:
李叶嘉; 黄伟韬; 李沛兴
（广州中医药大学顺德医院骨伤三科，广东 佛山 528300）
Author(s):
LI Ye-jia; HUANG Wei-tao; LI Pei-xing
(Department of the Third Orthopedics,Shunde Hospital Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Foshan 528300,Guangdong,China)
关键词:
改良减张增强术; 双排线桥缝合术; 大范围肩袖损伤; 肩关节功能
Keywords:
Modified load-sharing rip-stop repair; Suture-bridge repair; Large rotator cuff tears; Shoulder joint function
分类号:
R684
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.06.030
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 比较改良减张增强术（mLSRS）与双排线桥缝合术治疗大范围肩袖损伤患者的早期效果。方法 选取2018年1月18日-2020年11月31日我院收治的95例大范围肩袖损伤患者，按照随机数字表法分为对照组（45例）和研究组（50例）。对照组接受双排线桥缝合术治疗，研究组接受mLSRS治疗，比较两组Sugaya分级、肩关节疼痛情况、肩关节功能及肌力情况。结果 术后6个月，两组Sugaya分级愈合情况、未愈合情况比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。两组术后第7天VAS评分比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；研究组术后第14、21、28天VAS评分低于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。两组术后第90、180天Constant-Murley评分高于术前，肌力低于术前，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05），但组间比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 mLSRS与双排线桥缝合术治疗大范围肩袖损伤患者的早期疗效均较为理想，在促进肩关节功能恢复、改善手术侧肌力方面效果相似，但mLSRS术式在缓解术后肩关节疼痛方面优于双排线桥缝合术。
Abstract:
Objective To compare the early effects of modified load-sharing rip-stop repair (mLSRS) and suture-bridge repair in the treatment of patients with large rotator cuff tears.Methods A total of 95 patients with large rotator cuff tears admitted to our hospital from January 18, 2018 to November 31, 2020 were selected and divided into control group (45 cases) and study group (50 cases) according to the random number table method. The control group received suture-bridge repair treatment, and the study group received mLSRS treatment. The Sugaya classification, shoulder joint pain, shoulder joint function and muscle strength were compared between the two groups.Results At 6 months after operation, there was no significant difference in Sugaya grade healing and nonunion between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS score between the two groups at 7 days after operation (P>0.05). The VAS scores of the study group were lower than those of the control group at 14,21,28 days after operation, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The Constant-Murley scores of the two groups at 90 and 180 days after operation were higher than those before operation, and the muscle strength was lower than that before operation,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05), while there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05).Conclusion The early curative effect of mLSRS and suture-bridge repair in the treatment of patients with large rotator cuff tears is ideal, and the effect is similar in promoting the recovery of shoulder joint function and improving the muscle strength of the operation side. However, mLSRS is better than suture-bridge repair in alleviating postoperative shoulder pain.

参考文献/References:

[1]谈绎文,郑昱新,顾新丰,等.关节镜下改良Mason-Allen法与缝线桥法治疗肩袖损伤的疗效比较[J].国际骨科学杂志,2019,40(1):38-42.[2]陶海兵,冯哲,韩文锋,等.关节镜下肩袖修复术治疗肩袖损伤的早期临床疗效观察[J].局解手术学杂志,2019,28(12):953-955.[3]陈俊,楼珏翔,申屠国建,等.关节镜下改良阻挡线减张技术与缝线桥技术治疗大型肩袖撕裂的疗效比较[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2021(8):656-662.[4]朱健华,马一鸣.单,双排缝合技术治疗肩袖损伤对肩峰-肱骨头间距的影响[J].临床骨科杂志,2020,15(5):25-27.[5]潘界恩,陈刚,蔡震海,等.关节镜下两种双排缝合技术治疗肩袖大型撕裂的中期疗效比较[J].中国内镜杂志,2020,26(4):35-40.[6]Takeuchi N,Kozono N,Nishii A,et al.Stump classification was correlated with retear in the suture-bridge and double-row repair techniques for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair[J].Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc,2021,29(8):2587-2594.[7]王峥,张磊,马佳,等.改良减张增强术与双排线桥缝合术治疗大范围肩袖损伤患者的早期效果比较[J].中华外科杂志,2020,58(8):631-635.[8]刘玉雷,敖英芳,闫辉,等.关节镜下双排缝合桥固定技术治疗全层肩袖撕裂的中期疗效[J].中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2015,3(4):219-226.[9]江涛,吴在顶.关节镜辅助小切口肩袖修补术治疗肩袖损伤的疗效[J].安徽医学,2019,10(21):225-227.[10]Liu VK,Bouwmeester TM,Smith G,et al.Biomechanical comparison of knotless wide suture double-row SutureBridge rotator cuff repair to double-row standard suture repair[J].Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery,2020,29(8):20-25.[11]李晓,谭海涛,陆俭军.开放式与关节镜下肩袖修补术治疗肩袖损伤的临床效果对比[J].广西医学,2016,38(2):194-197.[12]何继业,张家红,蔡贵泉,等.关节镜下肩袖损伤修补术后早期运动和制动对肩关节功能的影响[J].中华创伤杂志,2021,37(2):122-128.[13]张华,向孝兵,李杰,等.全肩关节镜手术治疗肩袖损伤45例疗效分析[J].中国中医骨伤科杂志,2020,28(2):77-79.[14]刘伟乐,郑少伟,黎旭,等.关节镜下双排缝合桥无结修复技术治疗老年肩袖损伤的对照研究[J].中国临床解剖学杂志,2021,39(3):336-341[15]郑鸿,赵甲军,谭宏昌,等.关节镜下缝线桥与传统双排技术修复全层肩袖撕裂的比较[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2017,19(9):806-809.[16]马佳,张磊,朱立国,等.肩袖缝合同期关节镜下360°松解治疗肩袖损伤合并全方位肩关节粘连[J].中国骨伤,2020,33(4):348-352.

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01