Gennaro DelliCarpini, Michael Moore, Wendell Cole, Samuel Montgomery, Spencer Stein
{"title":"关节镜Bankart修复有或没有复位:单一机构的成本比较。","authors":"Gennaro DelliCarpini, Michael Moore, Wendell Cole, Samuel Montgomery, Spencer Stein","doi":"10.1007/s00590-025-04274-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Remplissage is a useful adjunct to repair of the anteroinferior glenoid labrum in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. This study aimed to compare costs and clinical outcomes between isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and ABR with remplissage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective study of all patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder instability between June 2011 and August 2021. Patient, procedural factors, and clinical outcome data were collected. Financial data was reported as \"relative costs\". The best fit circle method was utilized on MRI to estimate glenoid bone loss (GBL) and the Hill Sachs Interval (HSI). Using the glenoid track, patients were determined to either have 'on' or 'off' track lesion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>48 patients who underwent ABR alone and 49 patients who underwent ABR with remplissage were matched and included in analysis. There was no significant difference in total cost, mean number of dislocations, ED visits, or revision surgery between isolated ABR and ABR with remplissage. The remplissage cohort had a significantly higher rate of \"off-track\" lesions (24.5% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.013), % GBL (8.7% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.015) and Hill Sachs lesion size (16.7 ± 4.1 mm vs. 8.9 ± 6.9 mm, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No differences in total cost were found between ABR with or without addition of remplissage. Clinical outcomes were similar in both groups, despite a significant increase in the number of off-track lesions, HSI and GBL seen in the remplissage group. Surgeons may consider addition of remplissage in the appropriate clinical context with low concern of increased cost.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 3.</p>","PeriodicalId":50484,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology","volume":"35 1","pages":"175"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Arthroscopic Bankart repair with or without remplissage: a single-institution cost comparison.\",\"authors\":\"Gennaro DelliCarpini, Michael Moore, Wendell Cole, Samuel Montgomery, Spencer Stein\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00590-025-04274-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Remplissage is a useful adjunct to repair of the anteroinferior glenoid labrum in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. This study aimed to compare costs and clinical outcomes between isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and ABR with remplissage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective study of all patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder instability between June 2011 and August 2021. Patient, procedural factors, and clinical outcome data were collected. Financial data was reported as \\\"relative costs\\\". The best fit circle method was utilized on MRI to estimate glenoid bone loss (GBL) and the Hill Sachs Interval (HSI). Using the glenoid track, patients were determined to either have 'on' or 'off' track lesion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>48 patients who underwent ABR alone and 49 patients who underwent ABR with remplissage were matched and included in analysis. There was no significant difference in total cost, mean number of dislocations, ED visits, or revision surgery between isolated ABR and ABR with remplissage. The remplissage cohort had a significantly higher rate of \\\"off-track\\\" lesions (24.5% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.013), % GBL (8.7% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.015) and Hill Sachs lesion size (16.7 ± 4.1 mm vs. 8.9 ± 6.9 mm, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No differences in total cost were found between ABR with or without addition of remplissage. Clinical outcomes were similar in both groups, despite a significant increase in the number of off-track lesions, HSI and GBL seen in the remplissage group. Surgeons may consider addition of remplissage in the appropriate clinical context with low concern of increased cost.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 3.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50484,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"175\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-025-04274-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-025-04274-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在治疗肩前路不稳时,复位是修复前下盂唇的有效辅助手段。本研究旨在比较孤立性关节镜Bankart修复(ABR)和复发性ABR的成本和临床结果。方法:这是一项回顾性研究,纳入2011年6月至2021年8月期间接受关节镜治疗的所有前肩不稳患者。收集患者、程序因素和临床结果数据。财务数据报告为“相对成本”。在MRI上采用最佳拟合圆法估计关节盂骨丢失(GBL)和Hill Sachs间隙(HSI)。使用关节盂轨迹,确定患者有“上”或“下”轨迹病变。结果:48例单独行ABR的患者与49例合并行ABR的患者被匹配并纳入分析。孤立性ABR和复发性ABR在总费用、平均脱位次数、急诊科就诊或翻修手术方面没有显著差异。再穿刺组的“偏离轨道”病变发生率(24.5% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.013)、% GBL (8.7% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.015)和Hill Sachs病变大小(16.7±4.1 mm vs. 8.9±6.9 mm, p)均显著高于非再穿刺组。结论:再穿刺组与非再穿刺组的总成本无差异。两组的临床结果相似,尽管复发组的脱轨病变、HSI和GBL数量明显增加。外科医生可以考虑在适当的临床情况下增加再灌注,而不必担心增加费用。证据等级:三级。
Arthroscopic Bankart repair with or without remplissage: a single-institution cost comparison.
Background: Remplissage is a useful adjunct to repair of the anteroinferior glenoid labrum in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. This study aimed to compare costs and clinical outcomes between isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and ABR with remplissage.
Methods: This was a retrospective study of all patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder instability between June 2011 and August 2021. Patient, procedural factors, and clinical outcome data were collected. Financial data was reported as "relative costs". The best fit circle method was utilized on MRI to estimate glenoid bone loss (GBL) and the Hill Sachs Interval (HSI). Using the glenoid track, patients were determined to either have 'on' or 'off' track lesion.
Results: 48 patients who underwent ABR alone and 49 patients who underwent ABR with remplissage were matched and included in analysis. There was no significant difference in total cost, mean number of dislocations, ED visits, or revision surgery between isolated ABR and ABR with remplissage. The remplissage cohort had a significantly higher rate of "off-track" lesions (24.5% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.013), % GBL (8.7% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.015) and Hill Sachs lesion size (16.7 ± 4.1 mm vs. 8.9 ± 6.9 mm, p < 0.001).
Conclusion: No differences in total cost were found between ABR with or without addition of remplissage. Clinical outcomes were similar in both groups, despite a significant increase in the number of off-track lesions, HSI and GBL seen in the remplissage group. Surgeons may consider addition of remplissage in the appropriate clinical context with low concern of increased cost.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology (EJOST) aims to publish high quality Orthopedic scientific work. The objective of our journal is to disseminate meaningful, impactful, clinically relevant work from each and every region of the world, that has the potential to change and or inform clinical practice.