A Comparative Study on the Clinical Results of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair and Open Repair Surgery

Maziar Nafisi, Mohamd Reza Guity, Nima Bagheri, Saeed Khabiri
{"title":"A Comparative Study on the Clinical Results of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair and Open Repair Surgery","authors":"Maziar Nafisi, Mohamd Reza Guity, Nima Bagheri, Saeed Khabiri","doi":"10.5812/rijm.60817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Despite the obvious advantages of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, there are no definitive evidences regarding the superiority of this method over opensurgery. The aim of this study is tocompare the resultsof arthroscopic rotatorcuff repair and open repair surgery. Methods: A total of 52 patients referring to a general university hospital were included in the study and assigned to two groups of arthroscopic repair and open repair. Demographic information of patients and the presence of any underlying disease and the grade of rotator cuff tear were recorded. The pain scores of the patients were measured three times, before, 48 h after surgery and 6-monthfollow-up,usingtheVASsystem. Toevaluatetheclinicalperformanceof patients,UCLAscoringsystem(only6monthsafter the surgery) and Constant (before and 6 months after surgery) were utilized. Results: 32 patients were assigned to the open repair surgery and 20 to the arthroscopic repair group. The two groups were not significantly different in terms of pain variables, 48 hours after operation (P = 0.054) and 6 months after operation (P = 0.638), constant score 6 months after operation (P = 0.157) and UCLA shoulder rating scale 6 months after surgery (P = 0.167). Moreover, there was not any significant difference between the two groups with regard to these variables before surgery. Conclusions: The results of this study showed that arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was a safe procedure which was as effective as openrepairsurgery. Also,reducedpostoperativepainwasoneof theadvantagesof thismethodnotedinthepresentstudy,although the long-term severity of pain in this method was not significantly different from the pain of patients undergoing open surgery.","PeriodicalId":20994,"journal":{"name":"Razavi International Journal of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Razavi International Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/rijm.60817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Despite the obvious advantages of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, there are no definitive evidences regarding the superiority of this method over opensurgery. The aim of this study is tocompare the resultsof arthroscopic rotatorcuff repair and open repair surgery. Methods: A total of 52 patients referring to a general university hospital were included in the study and assigned to two groups of arthroscopic repair and open repair. Demographic information of patients and the presence of any underlying disease and the grade of rotator cuff tear were recorded. The pain scores of the patients were measured three times, before, 48 h after surgery and 6-monthfollow-up,usingtheVASsystem. Toevaluatetheclinicalperformanceof patients,UCLAscoringsystem(only6monthsafter the surgery) and Constant (before and 6 months after surgery) were utilized. Results: 32 patients were assigned to the open repair surgery and 20 to the arthroscopic repair group. The two groups were not significantly different in terms of pain variables, 48 hours after operation (P = 0.054) and 6 months after operation (P = 0.638), constant score 6 months after operation (P = 0.157) and UCLA shoulder rating scale 6 months after surgery (P = 0.167). Moreover, there was not any significant difference between the two groups with regard to these variables before surgery. Conclusions: The results of this study showed that arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was a safe procedure which was as effective as openrepairsurgery. Also,reducedpostoperativepainwasoneof theadvantagesof thismethodnotedinthepresentstudy,although the long-term severity of pain in this method was not significantly different from the pain of patients undergoing open surgery.
关节镜下肩袖修复术与开放式修复术临床效果的比较研究
尽管关节镜下肩袖修复有明显的优势,但没有明确的证据表明这种方法优于开放手术。本研究的目的是比较关节镜下旋转袖修复术和开放式修复术的结果。方法:选取某综合性大学医院收治的52例患者,分为关节镜修复组和开放式修复组。记录患者的人口统计信息、有无潜在疾病和肩袖撕裂程度。术前、术后48小时、随访6个月,采用vas系统分别测量患者疼痛评分3次。为了评估患者的临床表现,我们使用了UCLAscoringsystem(仅在术后6个月)和Constant(术前和术后6个月)。结果:32例患者分为切开修复组,20例患者分为关节镜修复组。两组在术后48小时(P = 0.054)、术后6个月(P = 0.638)、术后6个月不变评分(P = 0.157)、术后6个月UCLA肩部评定量表(P = 0.167)疼痛指标上差异无统计学意义。此外,两组在手术前这些变量方面没有显著差异。结论:本研究结果表明,关节镜下肩袖修复术是一种安全的手术,与开放修复术一样有效。此外,减少术后疼痛是本研究指出的该方法的优点之一,尽管该方法的长期疼痛严重程度与接受开放手术的患者的疼痛没有显着差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The Razavi International Journal of Medicine aims at publishing the high quality materials, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of Medicine and medical sciences. The Razavi International Journal of Medicine is an international, English language, peer-reviewed, open access, free access journal dealing with general Medicine and medical sciences, clinical and basic studies, public health, Disaster Medicine and Health Policy. It is an official Journal of the education and research department, Razavi Hospital and is published quarterly.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信