切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肩肘外科电子杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (02) : 107 -114. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5790.2024.02.003

论著

关节镜下V-Y结缝合方式与缝线桥技术修复中型肩袖损伤的比较
唐晓俞1, 邓凯文1, 冯剑1, 邹义源1, 郑新波1, 王小芃1,()   
  1. 1. 610000 成都第一骨科医院上肢科
  • 收稿日期:2023-07-04 出版日期:2024-05-05
  • 通信作者: 王小芃
  • 基金资助:
    2023年成都市卫生健康委员会科研项目(2023198)

Comparison of arthroscopic V-Y knot suture and suture bridge technique in repairing medium-size rotator cuff injury

Xiaoyu Tang1, Kaiwen Deng1, Jian Feng1, Yiyuan Zou1, Xinbo Zheng1, Xiaopeng Wang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Upper limb, NO.1 Orthopaedic Hospital of Chengdu, Chengdu 610000, China
  • Received:2023-07-04 Published:2024-05-05
  • Corresponding author: Xiaopeng Wang
引用本文:

唐晓俞, 邓凯文, 冯剑, 邹义源, 郑新波, 王小芃. 关节镜下V-Y结缝合方式与缝线桥技术修复中型肩袖损伤的比较[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(02): 107-114.

Xiaoyu Tang, Kaiwen Deng, Jian Feng, Yiyuan Zou, Xinbo Zheng, Xiaopeng Wang. Comparison of arthroscopic V-Y knot suture and suture bridge technique in repairing medium-size rotator cuff injury[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Shoulder and Elbow(Electronic Edition), 2024, 12(02): 107-114.

目的

回顾性研究关节镜下V-Y结方式与缝线桥技术两种缝合方式修复中型(1~3 cm)肩袖损伤的疗效。

方法

收集从2019年6月至2022年6月在本科行肩关节镜下手术治疗修复中型肩袖损伤并获得有效随访的患者60例,根据缝合方式不同分成两组:第1组采用V-Y结方式缝合(30例),男14例、女16例,平均年龄(58.60±4.61)岁;第2组采用缝线桥技术缝合(30例),男15例、女15例,平均年龄(58.37±4.60)岁。术后佩戴外展包保护6周,6周内进行被动肩关节活动,6周后开始进行肩关节主动上举锻炼。比较两组患者的围手术期指标,术前、末次随访时进行肩关节活动度、美国加州大学洛杉矶分校(University of California at Los Angeles, UCLA)肩关节评分、美国肩肘外科医师学会评分(American shoulder and elbow surgeons,ASES)、Constant-Murley评分及视觉模拟量表(visual analogue scale, VAS)比较疗效。

结果

所有患者获得随访,时间12~24个月,平均(16.05±3.34)个月,无感染和神经损伤等严重并发症,所有患者的切口甲级愈合。V-Y结组的手术时间明显少于缝线桥组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组的术中出血量、切口大小、住院天数、术前肩关节活动度以及各项评分的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。末次随访时,两组患者的肩关节活动度、VAS评分、UCLA评分、Constant-Murley评分、ASES评分以及随访时间的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。末次随访时两组患者的肩关节活动度及各项评分均优于术前(P<0.05)。

结论

关节镜下采用V-Y结缝合方式修复中型肩袖撕裂是可靠的缝合方式,其能够取得与缝线桥技术相当的临床疗效,并且使用的锚钉数量更少,手术时间更短。

Background

Rotator cuff injury is the most common shoulder joint disease in clinical practice, accounting for 50%-85% of shoulder diseases. With the increase in age, the risk of disease gradually increases, and the prevalence rate can reach 31% in people aged 60-69, while it is expected to reach 65% in people over 80. It is characterized by discontinuity of rotator cuff tendons (supraspinatus, infraspinatus, teres minor, and subscapularis), mainly manifested by shoulder joint pain and limited active activity. Arthroscopic suture repair of torn rotator cuff has become the gold standard for treating rotator cuff injury. Depending on the severity and size of the rotator cuff tear, the suture methods are also diversified, including the single-row anchor repair technique, double-row anchor repair technique, and suture bridge repair technique. A double-row suture anchor or suture bridge technique is usually used for medium to large rotator cuff tears. Although many factors affect the healing of the rotator cuff, most current studies believe that double-row suture anchor and suture bridge techniques have the same curative effect, and there is no significant difference between them in the rotator cuff healing score and retear rate. No matter what suture method is used, the purpose is to maximize the contact area between the rotator cuff and the footprint area to achieve as much anatomical healing of the repaired rotator cuff as possible. How to increase the contact area between tendon and bone and promote tendon-bone healing with fewer anchors to cover more of the footprint area has become the research direction of many scholars. Suture bridge technology is currently recognized as the first choice for treating medium to large-size rotator cuff tears. Biomechanical studies show that the suture bridge technique has advantages in repairing the rotator cuff, which can improve the compression contact area and average pressure between the tendon and fixed site, achieve strong fixation, and even distribution of suture tension, resulting in better healing effect of the rotator cuff. However, it also has disadvantages, such as many anchors used, high cost, complex and challenging operation, and relatively long operation time. The traditional internal and external technique can achieve rotator cuff repair by using one medial anchor and one lateral anchor, but it also has a defect that easily forms an "ear-like" deformity at the edge of the tendon. In order to prevent this defect, more medial and lateral anchors are usually implanted. As a result, the tendon-bone contact area in the footprint area is reduced, and the rotator cuff surface has too many linear knots, resulting in suture cutting of the tendon and other shortcomings. We propose an improved suture method, miming the "overlap" technique of increasing the coverage area of embroidery thread in "Sichuan embroidery" to optimize the contact area between the rotator cuff stop and the footprint area. This method is based on the conventional medial and lateral single anchor nail fixation row. After the medial row of the anchor suture line is drawn out, the cross Knot is imitative of the "V-Y knot" (shaped like V-Y), and then the lateral row is fixed. This method can prevent the formation of ear-like deformity at the tendon edge after rotator cuff repair and maximize the benefit, requiring only one internal and one external anchor.

Objective

To retrospectively compare the efficacy of two suture methods, the V-Y knot and the suture bridge technique, in repairing medium-sized (1-3 cm) rotator cuff tears.

Methods

A total of 60 patients underwent shoulder arthroscopic surgery to repair medium-size rotator cuff injury in our department from June 2019 to June 2022 and were effectively followed up and divided into two groups according to different suture methods. Group 1 was sutured with V-Y junction (30 cases), including 14 males and 16 females, with an average age of (58.60±4.61) years. Group 2 was sutured with suture bridge technique (30 cases), including 15 males and 15 females, with an average age of (58.37±4.60) years. After surgery, the patient was protected by an abduction bag for six weeks, passive shoulder movement was performed within six weeks, and active shoulder lifting exercise began after six weeks. Perioperative indexes of the two groups were compared. Shoulder joint motion, UCLA, ASES, Constant-Murley, and VAS scores were performed before surgery and at the last follow-up to compare the efficacy.

Results

All patients were followed up for 12 to 24 months, with a mean of (16.05±3.34) months. There were no severe complications such as infection and nerve injury; all patients had Grade A wound healing. The operative time of the V-Y junction group was significantly less than that of the suture bridge group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, incision size, length of hospital stays, preoperative shoulder motion, and scores between the two groups (P>0.05). At the last follow-up, there were no statistically significant differences in shoulder joint motion, VAS score, UCLA score, Constant-Murley score, ASES score, and follow-up time between the two groups (P>0.05). At the last follow-up, the two groups' shoulder joint motion and scores were better than those before surgery (P<0.05) .

Conclusion

Arthroscopic V-Y knot suture is a reliable suture method for repairing medium-sized rotator cuff tears, which can achieve clinical efficacy comparable to the suture bridge technique and requires fewer anchors and shorter operation time.

表1 两组患者的一般资料比较
图1 两种缝合方式修复肩袖损伤 图A:将1枚4.5 mm施乐辉公司内排带线锚钉(4条尾线)置入于软骨边缘;图B:4条尾端穿过撕裂的肩袖肌腱近侧;图C:相邻的2根尾线两两打结于两侧;图D:将两侧打结后的尾线各取1根打1个中间结;图E:收紧缝线可见内侧形似"Y字",外侧形似"V字";图F:"Y字"结可压在偏前的位置;图G:"Y字"结也可压于偏后的位置;图H:将打结后的4条尾线穿入1枚外排锚钉,把外排锚钉打入肱骨大结节外缘开孔处固定;图I:"V-Y"结最终分布形态图;图J:有结缝线桥技术示意图;图K:8条尾线交织成网状,穿入2枚外排锚钉打入肱骨大结节外缘开孔处固定
表2 两组患者术前活动度、VAS、UCLA、Constant-Murley及ASES评分比较(±s
表3 两组患者围手术期资料比较
表4 两组患者末次随访时肩关节活动度、VAS、UCLA、Constant-Murley、ASES评分及随访时间比较(±s
[1]
Weber S, Chahal J. Management of Rotator Cuff Injuries[J]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg,2020,28(5):e193-e201.
[2]
Bakhsh W, Nicandri G. Anatomy and Physical Examination of the Shoulder[J]. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev,2018,26(3):e10-e22.
[3]
Klouche S, Lefevre N, Herman S, et al. Return to Sport After Rotator Cuff Tear Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis[J]. Am J Sports Med,2016,44(7):1877-1887.
[4]
Fitzpatrick LA, Atinga A, White L, et al. Rotator Cuff Injury and Repair[J]. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol,2022,26(5):585-596.
[5]
Morag Y, Jacobson JA, Miller B, et al. MR imaging of rotator cuff injury: what the clinician needs to know[J]. Radiographics,2006,26(4):1045-1065.
[6]
Zhao J, Luo M, Pan J, et al. Risk factors affecting rotator cuff retear after arthroscopic repair: a meta-analysis and systematic review[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg,2021,30(11):2660-2670.
[7]
Huegel J, Williams AA, Soslowsky LJ. Rotator cuff biology and biomechanics: a review of normal and pathological conditions[J]. Curr Rheumatol Rep,2015,17(1):476.
[8]
Dang A, Davies M. Rotator Cuff Disease: Treatment Options and Considerations[J]. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev,2018,26(3):129-133.
[9]
Doiron-Cadrin P, Lafrance S, Saulnier M, et al. Shoulder Rotator Cuff Disorders: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Semantic Analyses of Recommendations[J]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil,2020,101(7):1233-1242.
[10]
Longo UG, Risi AL, Berton A, et al. Physical therapy and precision rehabilitation in shoulder rotator cuff disease[J]. Int Orthop,2020,44(5):893-903.
[11]
Denard PJ, Burkhart SS. The evolution of suture anchors in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair[J]. Arthroscopy,2013,29(9):1589-1595.
[12]
Hein J, Reilly JM, Chae J, et al. Retear Rates After Arthroscopic Single-Row, Double-Row, and Suture Bridge Rotator Cuff Repair at a Minimum of 1 Year of Imaging Follow-up: A Systematic Review[J]. Arthroscopy,2015,31(11):2274-2281.
[13]
Prasathaporn N, Thamrongskulsiri N, Itthipanichpong T, et al. Types of Retears After Knot-tying and Knotless Suture Bridge Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis[J]. Orthop J Sports Med,2022,10(11):951740660.
[14]
Mancini MR, Horinek JL, Phillips CJ, et al. Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Review of Surgical Techniques and Outcomes[J]. Clin Sports Med,2023,42(1):81-94.
[15]
Longo UG, Franceschi F, Berton A, et al. Arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair[J]. Med Sport Sci,2012,57:142-152.
[16]
Nho SJ, Delos D, Yadav H, et al. Biomechanical and biologic augmentation for the treatment of massive rotator cuff tears[J]. Am J Sports Med,2010,38(3):619-629.
[17]
Lapner P, Li A, Pollock JW, et al. A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Single-Row With Double-Row Fixation in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Long-Term Follow-up[J]. Am J Sports Med,2021,49(11):3021-3029.
[18]
Waterman BR, Newgren J, Gowd AK, et al. Randomized Trial of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff With or Without Acromioplasty: No Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes at Long-Term Follow-Up[J]. Arthroscopy,2021,37(10):3072-3078.
[19]
Macdermid JC, Bryant D, Holtby R, et al. Arthroscopic Versus Mini-open Rotator Cuff Repair: A Randomized Trial and Meta-analysis[J]. Am J Sports Med,2021,49(12):3184-3195.
[20]
Keener JD, Galatz LM, Stobbs-Cucchi G, et al. Rehabilitation following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a prospective randomized trial of immobilization compared with early motion[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am,2014,96(1):11-19.
[21]
Favard L, Bacle G, Berhouet J. Rotator cuff repair[J]. Joint Bone Spine,2007,74(6):551-557.
[22]
Ren YM, Zhang HB, Duan YH, et al. Comparison of arthroscopic suture-bridge technique and double-row technique for treating rotator cuff tears: A PRISMA meta-analysis[J]. Medicine (Baltimore),2019,98(20):e15640.
[23]
Wang W, Kang H, Li H, et al. Comparative efficacy of 5 suture configurations for arthroscopic rotator cuff tear repair: a network meta-analysis[J]. J Orthop Surg Res,2021,16(1):714.
[24]
Altchek DW. Arthroscopy of the shoulder[J]. Scand J Med Sci Sports,1995,5(2):71-75.
[25]
Atesok K, Fu FH, Wolf MR, et al. Augmentation of tendon-to-bone healing[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am,2014,96(6):513-521.
[26]
Voleti PB, Buckley MR, Soslowsky LJ. Tendon healing: repair and regeneration[J]. Annu Rev Biomed Eng,2012,14:47-71.
[27]
Cottrell JA, Turner JC, Arinzeh TL, et al. The Biology of Bone and Ligament Healing[J]. Foot Ankle Clin,2016,21(4):739-761.
[28]
Sheean AJ, Hartzler RU, Burkhart SS. Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair in 2019: Linked, Double Row Repair for Achieving Higher Healing Rates and Optimal Clinical Outcomes[J]. Arthroscopy,2019,35(9):2749-2755.
[29]
Nho SJ, Slabaugh MA, Seroyer ST, et al. Does the literature support double-row suture anchor fixation for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? A systematic review comparing double-row and single-row suture anchor configuration[J]. Arthroscopy,2009,25(11):1319-1328.
[30]
张晋瑞. 关节镜下单排缝合固定和双排缝线桥技术对肩袖损伤疗效的Meta分析[D]. 太原:山西医科大学,2022.
[31]
韩庆欣,张磊,张晟,等. 关节镜下缝线桥技术治疗肩袖损伤5年以上临床随访结果:术后再撕裂率及再撕裂对肩关节功能的影响[J]. 中国运动医学杂志,2021,40(6):427-432.
[32]
Bedeir YH, Schumaier AP, Abu-Sheasha G, et al. Type 2 retear after arthroscopic single-row, double-row and suture bridge rotator cuff repair: a systematic review[J]. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol,2019,29(2):373-382.
[33]
Sahin K, Sentürk F, Ersin M, et al. Repair Integrity and Functional Outcomes Between Knot-Tying and Knotless Suture-Bridge Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial[J]. Orthop J Sports Med,2021,9(4):941607538.
[34]
邓明月,向明,陈杭. 关节镜下改良缝合桥技术对冈上肌腱损伤患者肩关节活动度、疼痛评分及生活质量的影响[J]. 解放军医药杂志,2019,31(11):65-68.
[35]
Sano H, Komatsuda T, Inawashiro T, et al. Comparison between single and double suture passing techniques in the suture bridge rotator cuff repair with a 2-mm tape: A simulation study using a three-dimensional finite element method[J]. J Orthop Sci,2021,26(2):207-212.
[36]
韩增帅,赵夏,张益,等. 镜下改良与传统缝合桥技术修复肩袖损伤的比较[J]. 中国矫形外科杂志,2022,30(4):319-324.
[37]
康汇,李剑,王涛,等. 关节镜下"三角布钉"结合改良Mason-Allen技术治疗巨大"L"或"U"型肩袖损伤[J/CD]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2020,8(3):226-231.
[38]
欧阳建安,李康养,惠明,等. 关节镜下改良压配式双排缝合技术治疗肩袖大型撕裂的早期治疗效果观察[J]. 中国实用医药,2019,14(16):70-72.
[39]
黄德刚,杨昕,贺华正,等. 肩关节镜下单排简单间断缝合和单排改良Mason-Allen缝合治疗中小型肩袖损伤的效果[J]. 中国医药导报,2018,15(18):56-59.
[40]
陈挺霖,黄聿峰,潘凡武,等. 内排锚钉缝合桥技术联合传统缝合桥技术在重度肩袖撕裂肩关节镜中的应用[J]. 新医学,2022,53(11):826-832.
[1] 苏介茂, 齐岩松, 王永祥, 魏宝刚, 马秉贤, 张鹏飞, 魏兴华, 徐永胜. 关节镜手术在早中期膝骨关节炎治疗的应用进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 646-652.
[2] 纪小孟, 刘璠, 唐晓波, 卞为伟, 董佩龙, 刘振鲁. 两种手术方式治疗肩袖撕裂合并粘连性肩关节囊炎[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 561-567.
[3] 李程, 朱梁, 庞勇, 查国春, 仇尚, 孙伟, 冯硕. 侧侧缝合联合无结缝线桥技术治疗大型L型肩袖撕裂[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 301-306.
[4] 王典, 刘双赫, 曾峥. 肩关节镜术后肌肉功能改变对颈椎形态及矢状面参数影响的自身前后对照队列研究[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2024, 19(05): 371-378.
[5] 曲洋, 蒋浩然, 邢博涵, 张蒙, 张培训. 肩袖损伤的治疗进展[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 289-291.
[6] 冯亚飞, 唐诗添, 唐福宽, 周亮. 关节镜下mLSRS 技术及双排缝线桥技术治疗大型肩袖撕裂的疗效及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 295-301.
[7] 王友健, 陶然, 陆跃, 马洪冬. 退行性中、小型肩袖撕裂两种临床治疗效果对比[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 302-308.
[8] 严肃, 束昊, 吉同岳, 孙鲁宁. 肱二头肌长头腱切断与保留对中老年患者的中、小型退变性肩袖撕裂修补术后疗效影响[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 309-318.
[9] 谢娜, 纪东旭, 刘晨, 徐峰. 肩肱距离在肩痛患者诊断和治疗决策中的作用:一项回顾性的病例对照研究[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 326-331.
[10] 王洪, 王骏华, 范建楠. 人工智能技术在肩袖损伤中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 356-361.
[11] 胡子豪, 王喆, 陈建海, 齐岩松, 徐永胜. 聚合物材料在肩袖损伤治疗中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 362-368.
[12] 李婉玉, 张艳, 李冰冰. 肩袖损伤术后恐动症的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 369-372.
[13] 王涵宇, 王蕾. Bankart损伤的关节镜下修复进展[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(03): 262-270.
[14] 单磊, 周君琳. 同期修复肩袖撕裂结合锁定钢板治疗老年肱骨近端骨折的特点及疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(03): 211-215.
[15] 郁凯, 曾保起, 杨剑, 杨杰, 张殿英, 孙凤. 全关节镜与切开手术治疗肩袖撕裂疗效比较的系统综述与Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(03): 238-245.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?