肩关节镜下喙锁韧带重建术与切开改良Weaver-Dunn手术治疗肩锁关节脱位的疗效比较

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1671-167X.2015.02.012

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的：对比采用肩关节镜下喙锁韧带重建术与改良Weaver-Dunn术治疗肩锁关节脱位的临床疗效。方法：回顾性选取2011年1月至2012年6月连续收治并获得随访的63例肩锁关节脱位患者的临床资料，其中男性49例，女性14例，平均年龄（40.3±10.6）岁，受伤到手术时间平均为（10.3±5.3） d。根据Rockwood分型，其中Rockwood Ⅴ型肩锁关节脱位患者45例，Rockwood Ⅲ型并高运动水平需求患者18例。根据手术方式不同将患者分为关节镜手术组（32例）和切开手术组（31例）。术后定期随访，采用疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue score，VAS）、美国肩肘外科医师评分（American shoulder and elbow surgeons, ASES）及加州大学洛杉矶分校评分（University of California Los Angeles, UCLA）评价患者肩关节功能状况；同时拍摄双肩关节正位X线片，评估是否有肩锁关节复位丢失。结果：63例患者术后平均随访（29.6±6.0）个月（24~43个月）。关节镜手术组和切开手术组患者年龄［（41.0±10.5）岁vs.（38.0±10.8）岁）］、性别（男/女，24/8 vs.25/6）、损伤类型（Ⅴ/Ⅲ，22/10 vs.23/8）、受伤至手术时间［（10.6±4.9） d vs. （10.1±5.7） d］、主力侧累及情况（19/32 vs.17/31）、平均随访时间［（29.8±6.4）月 vs.（29.5±5.5）月］差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。末次随访时，两组患者肩关节平均前屈上举［（164.4°±17.2°） vs. （162.6°±12.9°）］、体侧外旋［（60.9°±17.0°） vs.（57.3°±15.8°）］及内旋［（第12胸椎体水平±3个椎体） vs.（第12胸椎体水平±3个椎体）］、平均ASES评分（96.0±5.1 vs.94.5±3.8）及UCLA评分（34.2±1.5 vs. 33.7±1.4）差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。关节镜手术组复位丢失率（1/32）低于切开手术组（7/31，P=0.026）。结论：采用肩关节镜下喙锁韧带重建术或改良Weaver-Dunn术治疗肩锁关节脱位，术后均可获得良好的肩关节功能，并且肩关节功能差异无统计学意义；关节镜手术组术后复位丢失率低于切开手术组。

关键词: 肩锁关节, 肩脱位, 关节镜检查, 修复外科手术

Abstract: Objective：To compare the surgical outcomes between arthroscopic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction and open modified Weaver-Dunn procedure for the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Methods:From January 2011 to June 2012, 63 consecutive patients with acromioclavicular joint dislocations who were treated with either arthroscopic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction or open modified Weaver-Dunn procedure were retrospectively reviewed after the final follow-up. There were 49 men and 14 women with a mean age of (40.3±10.6) years. The mean time from injury to surgery was (10.3±5.3) d. According to the Rockwood classification, there were 45 patients with type V injury and 18 patients with type Ⅲ injury. All the patients with type Ⅲ injury claimed high level of sport activity. The patients were divided into the arthroscopic surgery group (32 cases) or the open surgery group (31 cases) depending on the type of the surgery that each patient had taken. All the patients were routinely followed up after the surgery. The visual analogue score (VAS), American shoulder and elbow surgeons(ASES) score and University of California Los Angeles(UCLA) score were employed to evaluate the postoperative shoulder function. The postoperative radiographs of both shoulders were taken for each patient to evaluate the loss of reduction of the acromioclavicular joint.Results:The mean follow-up time was (29.6±6.0) months (range: 24 to 43 months). No significant difference was found between the arthroscopic surgery group and the open surgery group with regard to the patient’s age ［(41.0±10.5) years vs. (38.0±10.8) years］, gender (male/female，24/8 vs.25/6), classification (Ⅴ/Ⅲ，22/10 vs.23/8), time from injury to surgery ［(10.6±4.9) d vs.(10.1±5.7) d］, dominant involvement (19/32 vs.17/31)and mean follow-up time ［(29.8±6.4) months vs.(29.5±5.5) months］, P>0.05. At the end of the last followup, no significant difference was noted between the two groups regarding the mean forward elevation ［(164.4±17.2) degrees vs.(162.6±12.9) degrees］, mean external rotation ［(60.9±17.0) degrees vs.(57.3±15.8) degrees］, mean internal rotation ［(T12±3 vertebrae) vs.(T12±3 vertebrae)］, mean ASES scores (96.0±5.1 vs. 94.5±3.8)and UCLA scores (34.2±1.5 vs. 33.7±1.4), P>0.05.The rate of loss of reduction was significantly lower in the arthroscopic surgery group (1/32) compared with the open surgery group (7/31, P=0.026).Conclusion:Surgical treatment for acromioclavicular joint dislocations with either arthroscopic reconstruction or open modified Weaver-Dunn procedure could yield good results with no significant difference between the two groups as for the postoperative shoulder function. The rate of loss of reduction was lower in the arthroscopic surgery group compared with that of the open surgery group.

Key words: Acromioclavicular joint, Shoulder dislocations, Arthroscopy, Reconstructive surgical procedures

中图分类号:

R684.71

李奉龙, 姜春岩, 鲁谊, 朱以明, 李旭. 肩关节镜下喙锁韧带重建术与切开改良Weaver-Dunn手术治疗肩锁关节脱位的疗效比较[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2015, 47(2): 253-257.

LI Feng-Long, JIANG Chun-Yan, LU Yi, ZHU Yi-Ming, LI Xu. Arthroscopic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction versus open modified Weaver-Dunn procedure for acromioclavicular joint dislocations：comparison of curative effect[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2015, 47(2): 253-257.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	邵振兴,宋庆法,赵宇晴,崔国庆. 一种结合线袢固定的关节镜下“嵌入式”喙突移位术:手术技术及术后影像学分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 896-901.
[2]	郑佳鹏,肖棋,邓辉云,吴清泉,翟文亮,林达生. 外侧半月板腘肌腱区损伤的关节镜下分型和处理[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 891-895.
[3]	程嗣达,李新飞,熊盛炜,樊书菠,王杰,朱伟杰,李子奡,丁光璞,俞婷,李万强,孙永明,杨昆霖,张雷,郝瀚,李学松,周利群. 机器人辅助腹腔镜上尿路修复手术:单一术者108例经验总结[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(4): 771-779.
[4]	熊盛炜,杨昆霖,丁光璞,郝瀚,李学松,周利群,郭应禄. 输尿管损伤外科修复治疗的研究进展[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(4): 783-789.
[5]	张翠平,刘佩佩,傅强,高冠英,崔立刚,徐雁,王健全. 超声引导下髋关节药物注射在关节镜盂唇修复术后康复中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(2): 265-267.
[6]	章文博，于尧，王洋，刘筱菁，毛驰，郭传瑸，俞光岩，彭歆. 数字化外科技术在上颌骨缺损重建中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(1): 1-005.
[7]	张辉，刘心，洪雷，耿向苏，冯华. 全关节镜下腘肌腱重建与切开腘腓韧带重建治疗膝关节后外旋转不稳定的对比[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2016, 48(2): 237-243.
[8]	刘波，陈山林，朱瑾，王志新，杨辰，沈杰，田光磊. 腕关节镜辅助微创治疗月骨周围脱位[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2016, 48(2): 234-236.
[9]	张晓刚，张东，刘昌，万真，仵正，吕毅. 深低温保存同种异体血管的临床应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2015, 47(5): 891-封三.
[10]	廖晓星, 邢念增, 乔鹏, 康宁, 张军晖, 牛亦农. “三明治”法尿道重建技术改善腹腔镜下根治性前列腺切除术后早期尿控的效果[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2015, 47(4): 601-604.
[11]	于森, 王洋, 毛驰, 郭传瑸, 俞光岩, 彭歆. 1 107例上颌骨缺损的临床分类及修复方法分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2015, 47(3): 509-513.
[12]	童德迪, 陈山林, 荣艳波, 吴乐昊, 朱珊. 趾腓侧皮瓣在拇指指腹缺损修饰性再造中的临床应用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2015, 47(2): 326-329.
[13]	吴关, 姜春岩, 鲁谊, 朱以明, 李奉龙, 李旭. 改良关节镜下喙突移位Latarjet手术治疗肩关节前方不稳定[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2015, 47(2): 321-325.
[14]	朱以明, 姜春岩, 鲁谊, 李奉龙, 李旭, 李岳. 切开Latarjet 手术治疗复发性肩关节前脱位的临床随访研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2015, 47(2): 226-231.
[15]	李文军, 李淳, 朱瑾, 田光磊, 陈山林, 田文. 游离全厚皮肤移植重建甲床完全缺损的临床研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2012, 44(6): 860-865.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed