改良钛缆系统结合肩锁韧带修复治疗肩锁关节脱位

目的研究改良钛缆系统结合肩锁韧带修复治疗肩锁关节脱位临床效果。 方法对2014年1月至2019年3月期间在本院使用改良钛缆系统结合肩锁韧带修复进行治疗的21例肩锁关节脱位患者临床资料进行分析,包括脱位类型、受伤原因、手术时间、关节活动范围、X线片检查结果、美国肩肘协会评分（American shoulder and elbow surgeons,ASES）、Constant肩关节评分及Karlsson术后疗效评价。 结果21例患者获得随访,随访时间（13.05 ±2.62）个月,手术时间（50.57±8.13）min,术前等待时间（2.71±1.35）d。肩关节活动范围：前屈（167.14±5.19）°,后伸（41.14±2.20）°,外展（167.24±7.07）°,外旋（52.10±4.99）°,内旋（83.33±3.61）°。ASES评分（94.19±4.01）分（86.67 ~ 100分）,Constant评分（92.95±4.98）分（78 ~ 99分）,根据Karlsson术后疗效评价标准：优为15例（71.4%）、良为6例（28.6%）。 结论改良钛缆系统结合肩锁韧带修复技术治疗肩锁关节脱位可以获得良好的临床效果。     

关节镜下单排带线锚钉修补结合大结节骨髓刺激治疗大到巨大肩袖撕裂

目的研究关节镜下单排带线锚钉修补结合大结节骨髓刺激技术治疗大到巨大肩袖撕裂的临床效果。 方法对24例大到巨大肩袖撕裂患者,在关节镜下采用肩袖止点内移单排带线锚钉修补,并在修补肌腱外侧大结节裸露足印区打孔。术后按照康复计划渐进性康复训练。手术前和术后12个月对患肩采用VAS、UCLA、ASES评分系统进行疼痛和功能评估;并在术后第3天、3个月和12个月进行肩关节磁共振检查,观察肩袖修补和大结节足印区软组织覆盖情况。 结果所有患者随访12个月,术前和术后12个月VAS评分分别为（6.3±1.9）分和（0.4±0.1）分（P<0.05）,UCLA评分分别为（10.1±4.5）分和（30.4±4.2）分（P<0.05）,ASES评分分别为（27.9±17.8）分和（77.6±17.5）分（P<0.05）,所有手术肩关节疼痛和运动能力均较术前明显改善。术后12个月磁共振随访发现2例肩袖再撕裂发生,矢状位显示撕裂宽度均<1 cm;冠状位盂上切迹平面大结节足印区组织覆盖率在术后第3天、3个月、12个月平均分别为34.3%、89.1%和88.7%。 结论关节镜下肩袖单排带线锚钉修补结合大结节骨髓刺激技术治疗大到巨大肩袖撕裂能够提供可靠的修补,显著缓解疼痛,恢复肩关节功能并促进术后大结节足印区软组织覆盖。     

Multiloc髓内钉治疗肱骨近端骨折的临床疗效分析

目的探讨Multiloc髓内钉治疗肱骨近端骨折的临床疗效。 方法回顾性分析2015年1月至2017年7月在首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院骨科采用Multiloc髓内钉治疗并获得完整随访资料的33例肱骨近端骨折患者，年龄44~83岁，平均（68.7±15.7）岁；其中Neer分型二部分骨折22例，三部分骨折11例。分别记录手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合情况及手术并发症，采用视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale，VAS）及Constant-Murley评分评价患者术后肩关节功能情况。 结果手术均顺利完成，平均手术时间为93.2 min（70~150 min），术中平均出血量为108.2 ml（30~200 ml）。随访时间最短13个月，最长40个月，平均随访时间为（22.4±7.3）个月。末次随访平均肩关节疼痛评分0.47分（0~2分）。骨折平均愈合时间为（15.7±2.9）周，肩关节活动平均活动范围：前屈140.2°，外展135.9°，内旋36.0°，外旋54.4°。术后平均Constant评分为（85.9±10.8）分，其中优11例、良17例、一般3例，优良率为90.9%。末次随访时无一例发生切口感染、骨折不愈合及肩袖损伤等并发症。 结论Multiloc髓内钉治疗肱骨近端骨折具有手术创伤小、并发症少、内固定物牢固、关节功能恢复优良，对肱骨近端Neer分型二部分和三部分骨折有满意的治疗效果。     

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

目的探讨关节镜下以改良Mason-Allen(mMA)法及双排缝线桥(SB)法修复肩袖损伤的治疗效果。方法回顾性分析自2013年9月至2017年10月上海中医药大学附属曙光医院骨关节病专科诊治的59例肩袖损伤患者的病例资料,其中男26例,女33例,年龄(58.1±9.1)岁(34～79岁)。行全关节镜下手术,采用mMA法34例(mMA组),采用双排SB法25例(SB组)。术中记录包括肩袖撕裂大小、使用锚钉数量。分析术前及术后肩关节活动度(前举、外展、内旋、外旋)及疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Constant评分、加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校(UCLA)评分,并用MRI检查评估患者术后肩袖再撕裂情况。结果所有患者随访至少个12月。术前mMA组肩袖撕裂为(1.2±0.7)cm,小于SB组[(1.6±0.6)cm,P0.05];肩关节外展及外旋角度、Constant评分和UCLA评分SB组均低于mMA组(P0.05)。术中mMA组使用锚钉(1.2±0.4)个,少于SB组[(2.8±0.8)个,P0.05]。术后末次随访时两组患者的肩关节活动度及VAS、Constant评分和UCLA评分均较术前明显改善(P0.05),两组间的肩关节活动度及各项临床评分均无明显差异(P0.05)。MRI检查随访发现,两组患者肩袖再撕裂情况无差异(P0.05)。结论关节镜下以mMA法和双排SB法修复肩袖损伤均能有效改善患者肩关节功能并缓解症状,mMA法手术操作更为简单,植入锚钉相对较少,而SB法可能更适用于肩袖撕裂较大的患者。     

两种不同术式治疗合并肩胛上神经损伤的巨大肩袖撕裂后神经恢复的临床对比研究

目的对比传统双排修复术与阔筋膜移植术两种术式治疗合并肩胛上神经损伤的巨大肩袖撕裂患者的功能恢复情况。 方法回顾性分析2013年1月至2018年1月因巨大肩袖撕裂损伤于本院行关节镜肩袖损伤修复术患者20例,其中传统双排缝合组（A组）10例,阔筋膜移植组（B组）10例。所有患者术前均经肩关节MRI及肌电图诊断为巨大肩袖损伤合并神经损伤。术后1个月、6个月定期随访患者。比较手术前后两组患者的疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale,VAS）、美国加州大学洛杉矶分校（University of California at Los Angeles,UCLA）评分、Constant-Murely肩关节功能评分的变化情况。术后6个月复查肌电图及MRI评估肩袖愈合及神经恢复情况。 结果20例患者均获得随访,随访时间6~18个月。术后6个月A组VAS评分从术前（7.4±0.8）分下降到（2.3±1.7）分,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）,UCLA评分从术前（11.5±1.4）分上升到（28.3±5.8）分,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）,Constant-Murely评分从术前（45.6±6.2）分上升到（79.0±11.7）分,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）。B组VAS评分从术前（7.9±0.6）分下降到（2.7±1.8）分,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）,UCLA评分从术前（10.1±1.4）分上升到（26.9±6.9）分,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）,Constant-Murely评分从术前（39.0±3.4）分上升到（72.9±9.4）分,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）。术后6个月时两组患者VAS评分比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,两组患者UCLA评分比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,两组患者Constant-Murely评分比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。术后6个月复查肌电图,A组患者无肩胛上神经损伤,B组患者中有5例患者仍有肩胛上神经损伤（P<0.01）。 结论关节镜下巨大肩袖损伤传统双排修复术及阔筋膜移植术均能改善患者肩关节功能,双排缝合对于肩胛上神经功能恢复的短期效果要比阔筋膜移植组好,但再撕裂可能性大。     

肩关节脱位合并肩袖与Bankart损伤的诊治

目的 探讨关节镜下修复肩关节前脱位合并肩袖与Bankart损伤的疗效.方法 1999年9月至2007年7月收治16例肩关节脱位合并肩袖与Bankart损伤患者,男14例,女2例;左肩6例,右肩10例.交通伤8例,运动伤4例,牵拉伤4例.受伤至手术时间平均4.5个月(1.5～11.0个月).肩关节x线片显示肩盂撕脱骨折3例.16例患者肩关节核磁共振造影显示肩袖与Bankart损伤.关节镜探查发现肩袖于肱骨大结节处撕脱伴肩袖挛缩12例.采用关节镜下松解、缝合锚钉和骨锚钉同定缝合9例;因肩袖挛缩明显,进行关节镜与小切口辅助下肩袖缝合固定术3例;肩衲组织因牵拉松弛抬肩无力,采用等离子刀皱缩和肩袖缝合紧缩术4例.Bankart损伤采用关节镜下可吸收Bankart钉固定3例,钛合金缝合锚钉固定3例,关节镜下直接缝合修补盂唇3例,骨锚钉加会属锚钉固定7例.结果 16例患者术后获平均16.5个月(7～34个月)随访.肩关节稳定,肩外展和上举功能恢复正常12例,术后肩关节外展、抬举活动轻度受限2例,前伸活动疼痛2例.金属锚钉拔出再手术2例.采用美国加州洛杉矶大学UCLA肩关节功能评分:术前平均(21.5±5.5)分;术后平均(32.4±5.6)分,优12例,良4例.结论 肩关节脱位合并肩袖与Bankart损伤核磁共振造影有助于诊断;肩袖挛缩者应进行充分松解,无张力缝合固定有利于肩袖愈合;异体骨锚钉修复肩袖与Bankart损伤,生物固定、费用低廉,具有重要的价值.     

改良手术切口修复与关节镜下修复巨大肩袖撕裂的比较研究

目的比较改良手术切口修复与关节镜下修复巨大肩袖撕裂的临床疗效。方法纳入自2014-01—2017-01诊治的42例巨大肩袖撕裂,23例采用改良手术切口切开修复(切开组),19例在关节镜下修复(关节镜组)。比较2组手术时间、术中出血量,术后6个月疼痛VAS评分、肩关节功能Constant评分,以及并发症情况。结果 42例均获得至少6个月随访。与关节镜组比较,切开组手术时间更短,并发症发生率更低,术后6个月时肩关节功能Constant评分更高,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。2组术中出血量、术后6个月疼痛VAS评分比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论相对于关节镜手术,采用改良手术切口修复巨大肩袖撕裂能缩短手术时间,降低并发症发生率,能更有效改善患者肩关节功能。     

全镜下Latarjet手术治疗复发性肩关节前脱位伴严重肩盂骨缺损的早中期疗效分析

目的观察全关节镜下Latarjet手术治疗复发性肩关节前脱位合并严重肩盂骨缺损的早中期疗效。 方法对2015年4月至2017年2月在佛山中医院收治的复发性肩关节前脱位合并严重骨缺损行全镜下Latarjet手术患者病例资料进行回顾性研究，随访资料完整的共12例，其中男性10例、女性2例，左侧7例、右侧5例，平均年龄31.89岁（19~69岁），术前前方恐惧试验均为阳性, 平均脱位14.5次（9~30次）。所有患者均是根据术前双侧肩关节三维CT扫描对比测量计算其肩盂骨缺损程度>健侧肩盂宽度的25%，术中肩关节镜下对肩盂前缘骨缺损的范围和程度二次评估，所有患者肩盂呈倒梨形，且均合并Off-track Hill-Sachs损伤，所有病例均采用全关节镜下Latarjet术式加Bankart修补术进行重建，随访时采用美国肩肘外科医师评分 （American shoulder and elbow surgeons，ASES）、肩关节功能评定法 （constant-murley-score，CMS）、Rowe评分、视觉模拟评分法（visual analogue scale，VAS）和关节主动活动度评估术后患者肩关节功能，并且通过术后CT平扫和三维重建评估喙突植骨块的位置和吸收情况。 结果所有病例术后平均随访16.6个月（13~24个月），12例患者术后均未出现再脱位，术前与末次随访时前屈上举（142.00±4.88）°和（169.50±5.56）°相比较，差异有统计学意义（t=12.50，P<0.05）；术前与末次随访时内旋至T8和T9相比较，差异无统计学意义（t=2.29，P>0.05）；术前与末次随访时平均体侧外旋（59.00±4.20）°和（52.57±2.99）°相比较，差异具有统计学意义（t=6.97，P<0.05）；术前与末次随访时平均外展90°外旋（87.29±4.72）°和（79.00±7.53）°相比较，差异具有统计学意义（t=6.35，P<0.05）；术前与末次随访时ASES评分（69.20±3.42）分和（97.90±3.51）分相比较，差异具有统计学意义（t=779.24，P<0.05）；术前与末次随访时Constant-Murley评分（90.86±1.57和（96.57±2.99）分相比较，差异具有统计学意义（t=8.40，P<0.05）；术前与末次随访时Rowe评分（39.29±7.32）分和（92.86±2.67）分相比较，差异具有统计学意义（t=17.68，P<0.05）；术前与末次随访时VAS评分（7.21±1.54）分和（4.31±2.34）分相比较，差异具有统计学意义（t=17.68，P<0.05）,术后CT检查见有2例骨块有劈裂，但位置尚好，1例骨块位置较低，最后随访时7例患者骨块上端出现I级吸收，2例出现II级骨吸收。 结论在严格掌握适应证的前提下，对于复发性肩关节前脱位合并严重骨缺损的患者，采用全镜下Latarjet手术加Bankart修补术，能较好地恢复肩关节的稳定性，且创伤小，早中期疗效好，然而由于此种手术学习曲线较长，肩关节周围结构破坏较大，远期对肩关节的影响尚需进一步随访观察。     

关节镜下Mason-Allen技术治疗肩胛下肌腱损伤

目的：评价关节镜下Mason-Allen技术修复肩胛下肌腱损伤的临床疗效和修复后肌腱结构完整性。方法：回顾性分析2015年05月至2018年12月我科关节镜下采用Mason-Allen技术修复肩胛下肌腱损伤患者的临床资料。采用视觉模拟疼痛评分（Visual Analogue Scale, VAS）、美国肩肘外科医师评分(American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Scale,ASES)、Constant肩关节评分对肩关节功能评估,采用术前及术后6月MRI评价肩胛下肌腱的完整性。结果：共纳入患者98例,其中男性75例,女性23例,平均年龄56.4±9.6岁;平均随访12.5±4.0个月。术前Constant肩关节评分48.3±19.0分,ASES评分43.6±15.2分,术后末次随访后分别为74.5±14.2分和78.3±17.1分;术前VAS评分3.42分,术后末次随访1.91分;术前肩关节前屈上举（87.26±16.30）°、外展外旋（52.18±11.41）°、内旋L1（T6-S3）水平,术后末次随访前屈上举（151.28±17.65）°、外展外旋（75.76±8.68）°、内旋T11（T8-S3）水平;差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。7例（7.1%）MRI检查存在再撕裂。结论：关节镜下应用Mason-Allen技术治疗肩胛下肌腱损伤,临床疗效改善明显,肌腱完整性良好,是关节镜下修复肩胛下肌腱的一种有效方法。     

关节镜下双排锚钉缝线桥技术治疗肱骨大结节骨折

目的探讨关节镜下双排锚钉缝线桥固定技术治疗肱骨大结节撕脱性骨折的疗效。 方法随访2013年3月至2017年3月在南通大学附属建湖医院骨科接受治疗的骨折移位大于5 mm、骨折块面积小于3 × 3 cm,无其他损伤(如：肩袖损伤、SLAP损伤、Bankart损伤)的单纯肱骨大结节撕脱性骨折的且接受关节镜下双排锚钉缝线桥固定技术治疗的患者23例。收集患者末次随访的关节活动度、疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、美国肩肘外科医师(ASES)评分等数据资料。采用配对样本t检验对术前术后关节活动度、VAS评分、ASES评分进行比较。 结果所有患者均在3个月内实现骨性愈合。肩关节前屈活动度由术前(92.4±15.3)°提高至术后(148.7±15.3)°(t＝9.956,P<0.01),外展活动度由术前(85.0±12.6)°提高至术后(147.3±14.4)°(t＝15.502,P<0.01);外旋活动度由术前(21.5±10.2)°提高至术后(30.7±11.8)°(t＝12.058,P<0.01); VAS评分比术前降低(Z＝4.107,P<0.01); ASES评分由术前(29.7±6.1)分提高至术后(91.8±4.1)分(t＝41.879,P<0.01)。 结论关节镜下双排锚钉缝线桥技术治疗单纯性肱骨大结节撕脱性骨折效果确切,手术创伤小、恢复快、术后肩关节功能恢复良好。     

巨大肩袖损伤关节镜手术治疗进展

巨大肩袖损伤的手术治疗是骨科医师面临的一个挑战,且肩袖撕裂后肌腱回缩、粘连及脂肪浸润会进一步加大手术修复难度,所以如何更好地修复巨大肩袖损伤成为了目前研究的热点与难点。近年来,随着关节镜技术不断发展,肩关节镜手术已成为治疗巨大肩袖损伤的金标准,但其不同术式的适应证、效果及联合应用仍存在争议。笔者认为对于功能要求较低的老年患者,可行肩关节清理联合肩峰成形术或肱骨大结节成形术,可短期缓解患者肩关节疼痛;对于伴有肱二头肌长头腱损伤的患者,肱二头肌长头腱切断或固定术效果显著;完全修补术依旧是巨大肩袖撕裂的一线治疗方法,而对于无法完全修补的巨大肩袖撕裂可行部分修补术;对于功能需求较高的年轻患者,补片增强技术可带来良好的效果;对于肩关节内外旋能力受限且功能要求较高的患者,建议选用肌腱转位术;对于无明显盂肱关节炎、三角肌力量较好、功能要求较高的患者,上关节囊重建术更具优势。此外,肩峰下假体植入术因其创伤小、费用低、相对安全等优点成为目前研究热点,其长期效果仍需进一步证实。     

反式全肩关节假体置换治疗巨大不可修复肩袖撕裂

目的探讨反式全肩关节置换术（reverse total shoulder arthroplasty,RTSA）治疗巨大不可修复肩袖撕裂的临床治疗效果。 方法对南京中医药大学附属医院2018年5月至2020年1月收治的采取RTSA治疗的13例巨大不可修复肩袖撕裂患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。记录术前及最后一次随访时患者的肩关节前屈、外展、外旋活动,美国肩肘外科协会评分（American shoulder and elbow surgeons score,ASES）及美国加州大学洛杉矶分校（University of California at Los Angeles,UCLA）评分评估患者肩关节功能。并记录患者发生并发症的情况及影像学检查结果。术前行MR确定肩袖脂肪浸润程度,CT评价肩胛盂骨质情况及有无缺损,术后使用X线评估假体情况。 结果13例患者均随访至少12个月以上。统计术前与术后12个月数据之间的关系,术后12个月肩关节前屈、外展、外旋活动,ASES评分和UCLA评分较术前明显提高,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.01）。随访期内13例患者中有1例患者因局部血肿在术后1周行切开血肿清除引流术,所有患者功能恢复良好。 结论RTSA治疗巨大不可修复肩袖撕裂临床效果良好。     

Biomechanical comparison of single-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair technique versus transosseous repair technique

This study determined the effect of tear size on gap formation of single-row simple-suture arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) vs transosseous Mason-Allen suture open RCR (ORCR) in 13 pairs of human cadaveric shoulders. A massive tear was created in 6 pairs and a large tear in 7. Repairs were cyclically tested in low-load and high-load conditions, with no significant difference in gap formation. Under low-load, gapping was greater in massive tears. Under high-load, there was a trend toward increased gap with ARCR for large tears. All repairs of massive tears failed in high-load. Gapping was greater posteriorly in massive tears for both techniques. Gap formation of a modeled RCR depends upon the tear size. ARCR of larger tears may have higher failure rates than ORCR, and the posterior aspect appears to be the site of maximum gapping. Specific attention should be directed toward maximizing initial fixation of larger rotator cuff tears, especially at the posterior aspect.     

肩关节镜下单排缝合技术治疗肩袖撕裂

目的探讨肩关节下南加州骨科研究所单排缝合技术(SCOI row)治疗大中型肩袖撕裂的疗效。 方法对2018年6月至2018年8月南方医科大学第五附属医院关节外科使用SCOI row技术缝合治疗的大中型肩袖撕裂患者进行回顾性研究。纳入中型或者大型肩袖撕裂,排除依从性较差合并其他损伤的患者,共纳入26例患者,男10例,女16例;平均年龄(64±5)岁。SCOI row技术即采用单排3线锚钉固定结合足印区周围扩多个骨髓孔技术。术前关节镜下测量肩袖撕裂范围为2～4 cm,其中冈上肌撕裂9例(34.6%),冈上肌、肩胛下肌撕裂11例(42.4%),冈上肌、冈下肌、肩胛下肌撕裂3例(11.5%),冈上肌、冈下肌撕裂3例(11.5%)。术后6个月通过MRI评判肩袖是否愈合,测量足印区新组织厚度,比较术前与术后6个月疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)及肩关节功能评分(UCLA)及肩关节主、被动活动度。术前与术后6个月的数据比较采用配对t检验。 结果所有患者术后获(7.9±1.6)个月随访。术前、术后6个月VAS评分分别为(6.5±1.7)、(2.1±0.8)分,差异有统计学意义(t ＝10.225,P<0.05)。UCLA评分术前为(12.7±3.8)、术后6个月(31.1±1.6)分,差异有统计学意义(t ＝-3.066, P<0.05)。术后6个月足印区新组织厚度平均为(7.08±0.28)mm。术后6个月患者被动前屈、主动前屈、被动外展、主动外展、中立位被动外旋、中立位主动外旋活动度分别为(162.1±10.5)°、(155.3±38.5)°、(138.2±29.3)°、(130.4±22.4)°、(26.2±8.2)°、(15.3±7.3)°,均较术前明显提高(t ＝-7.913、-11.263、-8.286、-7.285、-11.734、-4.891,均为P <0.05)。术后6个月MRI显示肩袖撕裂足印区完全愈合为24例,再次撕裂2例,愈合率92.3%。 结论SCOI row技术缝合肩袖撕裂通过MRI评判愈合较高,肩关节功能恢复较好,疼痛缓解,是一种治疗肩袖撕裂的有效方法。     

Partial cuff debridement for irreparable defects of the rotator cuff

The treatment of massive rotator cuff tears can pose a difficult problem for the unprepared orthopaedic surgeon.There are many ways to treat massive rotator cuff tears, and one viable option is debridement with acromioplasty. For this form of treatment to be successful, the surgeon must choose his patient carefully. This report will focus on patient selection, biomechanics, and postoperative rehabilitation. A thorough understanding of rotator cuff tear biomechanics is needed when treating a massive tear; thorough physical and radiological examinations will help the orthopedist understand the biomechanic characteristic of the patient's tear. A tear that is balanced in both the transverse and coronal planes is stable and functional and will do well with debridement. Conversely, a tear that is unbalanced in either the transverse or coronal planes is unstable and nonfunctional and will not do well with simple debridement. Nonfunctional tears demand an attempt at rotator cuff tendon repair to restore balance to the cuff, making the tear functional. Debridement of a functional tear can be successfully performed with arthroscopic or open technique. Preservation or reconstruction of the coracoacromial (CA) arch is important because it adds anterosuperior stability to the shoulder with a massive rotator cuff tear. Postoperative rehabilitation is as important as the surgery itself and will also be emphasized. Many surgeons have had success with debridement of massive rotator cuff tears; however, as with any procedure, proper understanding of the pathology and proper patient selection is paramount to obtaining a successful result.     

Ultrasonography of the rotator cuff. A comparison of ultrasonographic and arthroscopic findings in one hundred consecutive cases

BACKGROUND: There has been limited acceptance of shoulder ultrasonography by orthopaedic surgeons in the United States. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the diagnostic performance of high-resolution ultrasonography compared with arthroscopic examination for the detection and characterization of rotator cuff tears. METHODS: One hundred consecutive shoulders in ninety-eight patients with shoulder pain who had undergone preoperative ultrasonography and subsequent arthroscopy were identified. The arthroscopic diagnosis was a full-thickness rotator cuff tear in sixty-five shoulders, a partial-thickness tear in fifteen, rotator cuff tendinitis in twelve, frozen shoulder in four, arthrosis of the acromioclavicular joint in two, and a superior labral tear and calcific bursitis in one shoulder each. All ultrasonographic reports were reviewed for the presence or absence of a rotator cuff tear and a biceps tendon rupture or dislocation. All arthroscopic examinations were performed according to a standardized operative procedure. The size and extent of the tear and the status of the biceps tendon were recorded for all shoulders. The findings on ultrasonography and arthroscopy then were compared for each parameter. RESULTS: Ultrasonography correctly identified all sixty-five full-thickness rotator cuff tears (a sensitivity of 100 percent). There were seventeen true-negative and three false-positive ultrasonograms (a specificity of 85 percent). The overall accuracy was 96 percent. The size of the tear on transverse measurement was correctly predicted in 86 percent of the shoulders with a full-thickness tear. Ultrasonography detected a tear in ten of fifteen shoulders with a partial-thickness tear that was diagnosed on arthroscopy. Five of six dislocations and seven of eleven ruptures of the biceps tendon were identified correctly. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonography was highly accurate for detecting full-thickness rotator cuff tears, characterizing their extent, and visualizing dislocations of the biceps tendon. It was less sensitive for detecting partial-thickness rotator cuff tears and ruptures of the biceps tendon.     

The effect of rotator cuff tear size on shoulder strength and range of motion

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of rotator cuff tear size on shoulder strength and range of motion. BACKGROUND: Patients with rotator cuff pathology typically present with weakness and motion loss in various motions. The extent to which the presence of a rotator cuff tear and the size of the tear affect strength and range of motion is not well understood. METHODS AND MEASURES: Sixty-one patients scheduled for surgery, with a diagnosis of a rotator cuff tear and/or subacromial impingement, underwent examination for shoulder pain, function, range of motion, and strength. The extent of rotator cuff pathology was documented during subsequent surgery (presence of tear, tear size, tear thickness). RESULTS: There were 10 massive tears, 15 large tears, 13 medium tears, 12 small tears, and 11 rotator cuffs without a tear. Patients had marked weakness in abduction strength at 90 degrees and 10 degrees of abduction, in external rotation strength at 90 degrees, and in the "full can test" (all, P<.0001). Marked range of motion losses in shoulder flexion and external rotation at 0 degrees and 90 degrees abduction (all, P<.001) were also observed. Abduction strength deficit at 10 degrees was affected by rotator cuff tear size (P<.0001). Twenty of 25 patients with large or massive tears had deficits greater than 50%, compared with only 1 of 11 patients with no tear, 2 of 12 patients with a small tear, and 5 of 13 patients with a medium tear (P<.0001). Other strength and range of motion deficits or indices of pain and function were unaffected by tear size. CONCLUSIONS: Weakness of greater than 50% relative to the contralateral side in shoulder abduction at 10 degrees of abduction was indicative of a large or massive rotator cuff tear.     

关节镜下盂肱关节前方松解对原发性冻结肩的早期疗效

目的观察应用关节镜进行关节囊前方松解术对原发性冻结肩的治疗效果。 方法2015年3月至2017年3月陕西省人民医院收治的60例原发性冻结肩患者,所有患者经术前MRI检查或术中探查确诊,排除由其余肩部疾病(骨折、肩峰撞击、肩袖损伤、钙化性肌腱炎)引起的继发性冻结肩,所有患者应用关节镜行盂肱关节前方松解术。采集术前及术后的疼痛视觉评分(VAS)、Constant评分、复旦大学肩关节功能评分系统(FUSS),应用单因素重复测量方差分析对结果进行统计学分析评估,对肩关节各方向的被动活动度应用配对t检验方法进行统计学分析。 结果所有患者术后均未出现腋神经损伤或肩关节不稳等并发症。与术前相比,术后12周时患者的VAS评分[(0.7±0.6)vs (8.1±0.7),F ＝38.01]、Constant评分[(93.9±3.0)vs (34.2±3.4),F ＝121.42]及FUSS评分[(93.8±1.3)vs (40.1±2.2),F ＝220.09]差异有统计学意义(均为P <0.01);同时,与术前相比,患肩被动外展[(152±13)° vs (74±9)°,t ＝37.678]、前屈[(156±12)° vs (60±10)°,t ＝46.469]、体侧外旋[(66±11)° vs (8±3)°,t ＝37.762]及内旋在术后12周时明显改善(均为P <0.01)。 结论应用关节镜对盂肱关节囊前方结构进行彻底松解,可有效改善原发性冻结肩患者肩关节功能。     

Biomechanical evaluation of arthroscopic rotator cuff stitches

BACKGROUND: The suture configurations in arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs have been limited to simple and horizontal stitches. Recent objective evaluations have demonstrated high failure rates of arthroscopic repairs of rotator cuff tears. A novel stitch for arthroscopic repair of the rotator cuff, the massive cuff stitch, was developed to increase the strength of the suture-tendon interface. The goal of this study was to determine the biomechanical properties of the massive cuff stitch and to compare it with other stitches commonly used for rotator cuff repair. METHODS: Eight pairs of sheep infraspinatus tendons were harvested and split in half to yield a set of four tendon specimens from each animal. Four stitch configurations (simple, horizontal, massive cuff, and modified Mason-Allen) were randomized and biomechanically tested in each set of tendon specimens. Each specimen was first cyclically loaded on an MTS uniaxial load frame under force control from 5 to 30 N at 0.25 Hz for twenty cycles. Each specimen was then loaded to failure under displacement control at a rate of 1 mm/sec. Cyclic elongation, peak-to-peak displacement, ultimate tensile load, and stiffness were measured with use of an optical motion analysis system and load-cell output. The type of failure (suture breakage or pull-out) was also recorded. A repeated-measures analysis of variance was performed on the results, with the alpha level of significance set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: There was no difference in cyclic elongation or peak-to-peak displacement among the four stitches. Ultimate tensile load was significantly higher (p < 0.05) for the massive cuff stitch (233 +/- 40 N) and the modified Mason-Allen stitch (246 +/- 40 N) than it was for either the simple stitch (72 +/- 18 N) or the horizontal stitch (77 +/- 15 N). There was no significant difference in the ultimate load between the massive cuff and modified Mason-Allen stitches. There was also no difference in stiffness among the four stitches. The simple and horizontal stitches failed by tissue pull-out, whereas the massive cuff and Mason-Allen stitches failed by a mixture of suture breakage and pull-out. CONCLUSIONS: The massive cuff stitch provides strength comparable with that of the modified Mason-Allen stitch commonly used in open rotator cuff repair. The ultimate tensile load before failure of the massive cuff stitch was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than that of the simple and horizontal stitches.