International orthopaedics · 2022
Subscapularis-sparing deltopectoral approach in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
An Ki-Yong, Park Ji-Yeon, Yoon Taek-Rim
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study compared the clinical and radiologic results of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) using either the subscapularis-sparing deltopectoral approach (SSDA) or traditional deltopectoral approach (TDA) in cuff tear arthropathy patients.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: We retrospectively evaluated 71 patients who underwent RSA for cuff tear arthropathy between July 2014 and December 2018. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical approach: TDA (34 cases) and SSDA (37 cases). The mean patient age was 78.6 years, and the mean (range) follow-up period was 23.5 (12-48) months. Clinical results were assessed using the Visual Analogue pain Scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon score (ASES), Korean Shoulder Scoring System (KSS), and Constant score. Radiographic indicators prosthesis-scapular neck angle (PSNA), peg-glenoid rim distance (PGRD), inferior overhang, acromion-greater tuberosity (AT) distance, and glenoid-greater tuberosity (GT) distance) were assessed, and notching severity was assessed according to the Nerot-Sirveaux classification.
RESULTS: The radiographic indicator results of the TDA and SSDA groups were as follows: PSNA (131.4° ± 17.2°, 136.1° ± 7.7°), PGRD (18.7 mm ± 2.9 mm, 21.4 mm ± 2.0 mm), AT distance (38.3 mm ±6.9 mm, 37.5 mm ± 6.8 mm), GT distance (51.6 mm ± 6.3 mm, 51.4 mm ± 5.3 mm), and inferior overhang (4.4 mm ± 2.2 mm, 2.9 mm ± 1.3 mm). PGRD and inferior overhang showed statistically significant differences between groups, but the clinical results showed no significant differences. There were no complications such as neurovascular injury, implant loosening, surgical site infection, or acromion fracture in either group.
CONCLUSION: SSDA for RSA showed no significant differences in clinical and radiological results compared with TDA. Therefore, SSDA is a viable alternative for RSA in cuff tear arthropathy.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: We retrospectively evaluated 71 patients who underwent RSA for cuff tear arthropathy between July 2014 and December 2018. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical approach: TDA (34 cases) and SSDA (37 cases). The mean patient age was 78.6 years, and the mean (range) follow-up period was 23.5 (12-48) months. Clinical results were assessed using the Visual Analogue pain Scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon score (ASES), Korean Shoulder Scoring System (KSS), and Constant score. Radiographic indicators prosthesis-scapular neck angle (PSNA), peg-glenoid rim distance (PGRD), inferior overhang, acromion-greater tuberosity (AT) distance, and glenoid-greater tuberosity (GT) distance) were assessed, and notching severity was assessed according to the Nerot-Sirveaux classification.
RESULTS: The radiographic indicator results of the TDA and SSDA groups were as follows: PSNA (131.4° ± 17.2°, 136.1° ± 7.7°), PGRD (18.7 mm ± 2.9 mm, 21.4 mm ± 2.0 mm), AT distance (38.3 mm ±6.9 mm, 37.5 mm ± 6.8 mm), GT distance (51.6 mm ± 6.3 mm, 51.4 mm ± 5.3 mm), and inferior overhang (4.4 mm ± 2.2 mm, 2.9 mm ± 1.3 mm). PGRD and inferior overhang showed statistically significant differences between groups, but the clinical results showed no significant differences. There were no complications such as neurovascular injury, implant loosening, surgical site infection, or acromion fracture in either group.
CONCLUSION: SSDA for RSA showed no significant differences in clinical and radiological results compared with TDA. Therefore, SSDA is a viable alternative for RSA in cuff tear arthropathy.