无会阴柱髋关节镜手术的医生报告结果:一项国际调查

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Alexander Volpi, Kristin Twomey Hopkins, Malachy McHugh, Gregory Galano
{"title":"无会阴柱髋关节镜手术的医生报告结果:一项国际调查","authors":"Alexander Volpi, Kristin Twomey Hopkins, Malachy McHugh, Gregory Galano","doi":"10.1093/jhps/hnac038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the current literature reports an acceptable rate of complications with the use of a perineal post in hip arthroscopy, they are still possible and preventable. The purpose of this study was to survey International Society for Hip Arthroscopy (ISHA) members on their use of postless distraction in hip arthroscopy. A 19-question survey was emailed to hip preservation surgeons that are members of ISHA. The questions examined surgeons’ location, experience, utilization of a perineal post or postless distraction and any complications they may have encountered. In all, 145 respondents completed the survey. Regarding complications encountered when using a perineal post, the most frequent responses were temporary nerve damage (115, 80.6%), temporary genitourinary complications (39, 27%), temporary genital skin injury (35, 24%) and permanent nerve injury (12, 8%). Regarding the postless technique, of the 60 respondents who noted they have utilized postless distraction, 9 (15%) reported complications, with 7 (12%) reporting temporary nerve damage being the most common and 0 reporting cases of permanent nerve injury. These were statistically significantly less than those reported with a perineal post. Ninety-seven percent reported that after utilizing postless distraction, their patients were recovering better than or the same as when using a perineal post. This survey had excellent international participation by experienced hip arthroscopists. There were a statistically significantly decreased number of complications reported by the surgeons utilizing postless distraction. This survey highlights that postless distraction is being done successfully with lower reported complications and excellent patient recovery.","PeriodicalId":48583,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hip Preservation Surgery","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physician reported outcomes of hip arthroscopy without a perineal post: an international survey\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Volpi, Kristin Twomey Hopkins, Malachy McHugh, Gregory Galano\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jhps/hnac038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although the current literature reports an acceptable rate of complications with the use of a perineal post in hip arthroscopy, they are still possible and preventable. The purpose of this study was to survey International Society for Hip Arthroscopy (ISHA) members on their use of postless distraction in hip arthroscopy. A 19-question survey was emailed to hip preservation surgeons that are members of ISHA. The questions examined surgeons’ location, experience, utilization of a perineal post or postless distraction and any complications they may have encountered. In all, 145 respondents completed the survey. Regarding complications encountered when using a perineal post, the most frequent responses were temporary nerve damage (115, 80.6%), temporary genitourinary complications (39, 27%), temporary genital skin injury (35, 24%) and permanent nerve injury (12, 8%). Regarding the postless technique, of the 60 respondents who noted they have utilized postless distraction, 9 (15%) reported complications, with 7 (12%) reporting temporary nerve damage being the most common and 0 reporting cases of permanent nerve injury. These were statistically significantly less than those reported with a perineal post. Ninety-seven percent reported that after utilizing postless distraction, their patients were recovering better than or the same as when using a perineal post. This survey had excellent international participation by experienced hip arthroscopists. There were a statistically significantly decreased number of complications reported by the surgeons utilizing postless distraction. This survey highlights that postless distraction is being done successfully with lower reported complications and excellent patient recovery.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48583,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hip Preservation Surgery\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hip Preservation Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnac038\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hip Preservation Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnac038","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管目前的文献报道在髋关节镜手术中使用会阴柱的并发症发生率尚可接受,但并发症仍有可能发生,而且是可以预防的。本研究旨在调查国际髋关节镜学会 (ISHA) 会员在髋关节镜手术中使用无后路牵引的情况。我们通过电子邮件向国际髋关节镜学会会员中的保髋外科医生发送了一份包含 19 个问题的调查问卷。问题涉及外科医生的工作地点、经验、会阴柱或无后路牵引的使用情况以及可能遇到的并发症。共有 145 位受访者完成了调查。关于使用会阴柱时遇到的并发症,最常见的回答是暂时性神经损伤(115 人,占 80.6%)、暂时性泌尿生殖系统并发症(39 人,占 27%)、暂时性生殖器皮肤损伤(35 人,占 24%)和永久性神经损伤(12 人,占 8%)。关于无后庭技术,60 位受访者表示他们使用过无后庭牵引术,其中 9 位(15%)报告了并发症,7 位(12%)报告了最常见的暂时性神经损伤,0 位报告了永久性神经损伤。从统计学角度看,这些并发症明显少于使用会阴支柱的并发症。97%的人表示,在使用无柱牵引后,他们的病人恢复得比使用会阴柱时更好或与使用会阴柱时相同。这项调查得到了国际上经验丰富的髋关节镜医师的广泛参与。据统计,使用无后路牵引的外科医生报告的并发症数量明显减少。这项调查表明,无后路牵引术的成功实施降低了并发症的发生率,患者恢复良好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Physician reported outcomes of hip arthroscopy without a perineal post: an international survey
Although the current literature reports an acceptable rate of complications with the use of a perineal post in hip arthroscopy, they are still possible and preventable. The purpose of this study was to survey International Society for Hip Arthroscopy (ISHA) members on their use of postless distraction in hip arthroscopy. A 19-question survey was emailed to hip preservation surgeons that are members of ISHA. The questions examined surgeons’ location, experience, utilization of a perineal post or postless distraction and any complications they may have encountered. In all, 145 respondents completed the survey. Regarding complications encountered when using a perineal post, the most frequent responses were temporary nerve damage (115, 80.6%), temporary genitourinary complications (39, 27%), temporary genital skin injury (35, 24%) and permanent nerve injury (12, 8%). Regarding the postless technique, of the 60 respondents who noted they have utilized postless distraction, 9 (15%) reported complications, with 7 (12%) reporting temporary nerve damage being the most common and 0 reporting cases of permanent nerve injury. These were statistically significantly less than those reported with a perineal post. Ninety-seven percent reported that after utilizing postless distraction, their patients were recovering better than or the same as when using a perineal post. This survey had excellent international participation by experienced hip arthroscopists. There were a statistically significantly decreased number of complications reported by the surgeons utilizing postless distraction. This survey highlights that postless distraction is being done successfully with lower reported complications and excellent patient recovery.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
20.00%
发文量
45
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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