首页> 外文期刊>Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine >Predictive Value and Clinical Validation of the “On-Track” vs. “Off-Track” Concept in Bipolar Bone Loss in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
【24h】

Predictive Value and Clinical Validation of the “On-Track” vs. “Off-Track” Concept in Bipolar Bone Loss in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability

机译:“轨道”与“离轨”与“离径”概念在双极性骨质损失中的预测价值和临床验证

获取原文
           

摘要

Objectives: Bone loss is a well-described risk factor for failure with arthroscopic stabilization. The isolated importance of bone loss on both the glenoid and humeral side has been increasingly studied. A more recent evolution considers how both the glenoid and humeral bone loss interact to determine whether their combination results in an “on-track” or “off-track” lesion, which may be more predictive of recurrent instability than looking at either side individually. While the biomechanics of this concept have been elucidated, no study has tested this theory in a clinical population. The purpose of this study is to compare a series of arthroscopic Bankart reconstructions stratified by whether they are “on-track” or “off-track” with regard to bipolar bone loss and to compare their rates of recurrence and functional outcome scores. Methods: Over a two year period, all isolated, primary Bankart reconstructions performed at a single facility by one of three fellowship trained Orthopaedic Sports Surgeons were included in this study. All patients had preoperative advanced imaging and had postoperative outcome measures including SANE and WOSI scores, as well as data return to work status. Glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs lesion size and location, as well as a radiographic measurement of the glenoid track were measured. Patients were stratified according to whether they sustained a subsequent recurrence of their instability, and these groups were analyzed according to their bone loss status, specifically whether they were “on-track” or “off-track”. Results: 57 shoulders met inclusion criteria. The average age was 25.5 years (range 20-42) at the time of surgery. Average follow up was 28.4 mos. There were 10 recurrences (18%). Patients in the recurrent group had WOSI and SANE scores that were roughly half as good as the group that did not recur (p=0.003 and p=0.002 respectively). Of the 49 on-track patients, 4 (8.2%) failed. Conversely, of the 8 off-track patients, 6 (75%) failed (p=0.0001). Six of the 10 (60%) of the patients who sustained a recurrence of their instability after arthroscopic stabilization were off-track at the time of their surgery. In contrast, in the 47 patients who remained stable at latest follow-up, only 2 (4.3%) were off-track (p=0.0001). Eight of 47 patients (17%) in the non-recurrent group had glenoid bone loss greater than 20%; two of 47 stable patients (4%) were off-track. The positive predictive value (PPV) of the off-track measurement was 75% which was significantly higher than the predictive value of glenoid bone loss >20% (PPV=43%, p=0.02). Conclusion: This is the first study to apply the on-track vs. off-track assessment of bipolar bone loss to a clinical population. In this study, being off-track was a significant predictor of recurrent instability after isolated Bankart reconstruction, correctly predicting failure in 75% of cases. This was superior to the predictive value of glenoid bone loss >20% alone, which correctly predicted failure 43% of the time. Recurrence correlated with worse functional outcomes scores. Bipolar bone loss as measured by the track method is quite accurate in predicting success and failure after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction in a clinical population. This method of assessment is encouraged as a routine part of the preoperative evaluation of all patients under consideration for arthroscopic anterior stabilization.
机译:目的:骨质损失是具有关节镜稳定失效的良好描述的风险因素。越来越多地研究了骨质损失对骨骼和肱骨侧的孤立重要性。更新的进化考虑了眼盂和肱骨骨质损失如何相互作用,以确定它们的组合是否导致“轨道”或“偏离轨道”病变,这可能比单独看起来更能预测到经常性不稳定。虽然这一概念的生物力学已经阐明,但在临床人群中没有研究该理论。本研究的目的是比较一系列的关节镜底盘重建,这些间隔基于对双极性骨质损失的“在轨道”或“偏离轨道”分层,并比较其复发和功能结果评分的率。方法:在这项研究中,在一项孤立的两年内,所有孤立的孤立的主要纸币重建于三个奖学金训练的骨科体育外科医生中的一个设施。所有患者均具有术前高级成像,并在术后术后措施,包括SANE和WOSI分数,以及数据返回工作状态。胶质骨损失,丘陵骨损伤大小和位置,以及关节盂轨道的放射线测量。根据它们是否持续到其不稳定性的复发,并且这些群体根据其骨丢失状态分析,特别是它们是“在轨道上”或“离轨道”的分析。结果:57肩部符合纳入标准。手术时,平均年龄为25.5岁(范围20-42)。平均跟进是28.4 mos。有10个复发(18%)。复发组中的患者具有大约一半的WOSI和SANE评分,与不重复的组(分别为0.003和p = 0.002)。在49名上的患者中,4(8.2%)失败。相反,在8名偏远患者中,6名(75%)失败(P = 0.0001)。 10(60%)的患者中有六种患者,在关节镜稳定后持续其不稳定的患者在手术时偏离轨道。相比之下,在最新随访的47名患者中,只有2(4.3%)偏离轨道(P = 0.0001)。非反复间组中的8例患者中有八个(17%)胶质骨损失大于20%; 47名稳定患者中的两个(4%)是偏离轨道。偏离轨道测量的阳性预测值(PPV)为75%,其显着高于关节骨损失> 20%(PPV = 43%,P = 0.02)的预测值。结论:这是第一项申请轨道与诊所骨质损失对临床群体的脱轨评估的研究。在这项研究中,偏离轨迹是孤立后的底盘重建后经常不稳定的重要预测因子,在75%的病例中正确预测失败。这优于胶质骨损失> 20%的预测值,这是43%的时间正确预测失败。复发与更严重的功能成果分数相关。通过轨道法测量的双极性骨质损失是在临床群体中的关节镜底盘重建后预测成功和失败的准确性。这种评估方法被认为是在关节镜前稳定所考虑的所有患者的所有患者的常规评估中的常规部分。

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