...
首页> 外文期刊>Indian journal of orthopaedics >Clinical outcomes of arthroscopic single and double row repair in full thickness rotator cuff tears
【24h】

Clinical outcomes of arthroscopic single and double row repair in full thickness rotator cuff tears

机译:关节镜单排和双排修复全厚度肩袖撕裂的临床结果

获取原文

摘要

Background:There has been a recent interest in the double row repair method for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair following favourable biomechanical results reported by some studies. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical results of arthroscopic single row and double row repair methods in the full-thickness rotator cuff tears.Materials and Methods:22 patients of arthroscopic single row repair (group I) and 25 patients who underwent double row repair (group II) from March 2003 to March 2005 were retrospectively evaluated and compared for the clinical outcomes. The mean age was 58 years and 56 years respectively for group I and II. The average follow-up in the two groups was 24 months. The evaluation was done by using the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) rating scale and the shoulder index of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES).Results:In Group I, the mean ASES score increased from 30.48 to 87.40 and the mean ASES score increased from 32.00 to 91.45 in the Group II. The mean UCLA score increased from the preoperative 12.23 to 30.82 in Group I and from 12.20 to 32.40 in Group II. Each method has shown no statistical clinical differences between two methods, but based on the sub scores of UCLA score, the double row repair method yields better results for the strength, and it gives more satisfaction to the patients than the single row repair method.Conclusions:Comparing the two methods, double row repair group showed better clinical results in recovering strength and gave more satisfaction to the patients but no statistical clinical difference was found between 2 methods.
机译:背景:由于一些研究报告了良好的生物力学结果,近来对关节镜式肩袖修复的双排修复方法产生了兴趣。本研究的目的是比较关节镜单行和双行修复方法在全厚度肩袖撕裂中的临床效果。材料与方法:22例关节镜单行修复(I组)和25例行双刀修复回顾性评估2003年3月至2005年3月的行修复(第二组)并比较临床结果。第一组和第二组的平均年龄分别为58岁和56岁。两组平均随访24个月。通过使用加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校(UCLA)评分量表和美国肩肘外科医师(ASES)的肩部指数进行评估。结果:在第一组中,平均ASES得分从30.48提高到87.40,平均第二组的ASES分数从32.00提高到91.45。第一组的平均UCLA评分从术前的12.23提高到30.82,第二组的平均UCLA评分从术前的12.20提高到32.40。每种方法在两种方法之间均未显示出统计学上的临床差异,但基于UCLA分数的子评分,双行修复方法比单行修复方法产生更好的强度结果,并且使患者更加满意。 :比较两种方法,双排修复组在恢复强度方面表现出更好的临床效果,并使患者更满意,但是两种方法之间没有统计学差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号