Cargando…
Is Anatomical Healing Essential for Better Clinical Outcome in Type II SLAP Repair? Clinico-Radiological Outcome after Type II SLAP Repair
BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that anatomical healing in superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) repair is associated with good clinical outcome. The purposes of this study were to assess the failure rate of anatomical healing after arthroscopic repair of SLAP lesions using computed tomography ar...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Korean Orthopaedic Association
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6107812/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30174813 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios.2018.10.3.358 |
_version_ | 1783350034059755520 |
---|---|
author | Nashikkar, Piyush Suresh Rhee, Sung-Min Desai, Chintan Vinod Oh, Joo Han |
author_facet | Nashikkar, Piyush Suresh Rhee, Sung-Min Desai, Chintan Vinod Oh, Joo Han |
author_sort | Nashikkar, Piyush Suresh |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that anatomical healing in superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) repair is associated with good clinical outcome. The purposes of this study were to assess the failure rate of anatomical healing after arthroscopic repair of SLAP lesions using computed tomography arthrography (CTA), investigate correlation of the rate with clinical outcomes, and identify prognostic factors for anatomical failure following SLAP repair. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the outcome of 43 patients at a minimum follow-up of 1 year after arthroscopic surgery for SLAP lesions or SLAP lesions associated with Bankart lesions. Twenty-eight patients underwent isolated SLAP repair and 15 patients underwent Bankart repair with SLAP repair. The anatomical outcome was assessed using CTA at 1 year after surgery. Clinical outcomes including visual analogue scale for pain and satisfaction and Constant score were assessed at the final follow-up. We investigated clinical failure that was defined as stiffness, loss of maximum rotation, deterioration of pain, and/or need for revision of surgery. RESULTS: Anatomical failure occurred in 32.6% of patients (14/43), whereas 16.3% of patients (7/43) had clinical failure. Clinicoradiological assessment revealed that clinical failure occurred only in 7.1% of patients (1/14) with unhealed SLAP lesions, whereas it occurred in 20.7% of patients (6/29) with healed SLAP lesions. Isolated SLAP repair resulted in a higher risk of anatomical failure (risk ratio, 7.0) than combined SLAP repair (p = 0.015). Nonoverhead activities were associated with higher risk of anatomical failure (risk ratio, 2.9; p = 0.041). Patients above 35 years of age had more risk of anatomical failure (risk ratio, 3.5; p = 0.010). Clinical outcomes significantly improved regardless of anatomical failure (p < 0.001) and were not significantly different between unhealed and healed repairs (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Since patients with unhealed SLAP lesions had less clinical failure than patients with healed SLAP lesions, anatomical healing does not seem essential for better clinical outcome of SLAP II repair, especially in patients with higher healing failure risk (isolated SLAP repair, nonoverhead activities, and above 35 years of age). Therefore, we believe the indications of SLAP repair should be narrowed to avoid overtreatment. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6107812 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | The Korean Orthopaedic Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61078122018-09-01 Is Anatomical Healing Essential for Better Clinical Outcome in Type II SLAP Repair? Clinico-Radiological Outcome after Type II SLAP Repair Nashikkar, Piyush Suresh Rhee, Sung-Min Desai, Chintan Vinod Oh, Joo Han Clin Orthop Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that anatomical healing in superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) repair is associated with good clinical outcome. The purposes of this study were to assess the failure rate of anatomical healing after arthroscopic repair of SLAP lesions using computed tomography arthrography (CTA), investigate correlation of the rate with clinical outcomes, and identify prognostic factors for anatomical failure following SLAP repair. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the outcome of 43 patients at a minimum follow-up of 1 year after arthroscopic surgery for SLAP lesions or SLAP lesions associated with Bankart lesions. Twenty-eight patients underwent isolated SLAP repair and 15 patients underwent Bankart repair with SLAP repair. The anatomical outcome was assessed using CTA at 1 year after surgery. Clinical outcomes including visual analogue scale for pain and satisfaction and Constant score were assessed at the final follow-up. We investigated clinical failure that was defined as stiffness, loss of maximum rotation, deterioration of pain, and/or need for revision of surgery. RESULTS: Anatomical failure occurred in 32.6% of patients (14/43), whereas 16.3% of patients (7/43) had clinical failure. Clinicoradiological assessment revealed that clinical failure occurred only in 7.1% of patients (1/14) with unhealed SLAP lesions, whereas it occurred in 20.7% of patients (6/29) with healed SLAP lesions. Isolated SLAP repair resulted in a higher risk of anatomical failure (risk ratio, 7.0) than combined SLAP repair (p = 0.015). Nonoverhead activities were associated with higher risk of anatomical failure (risk ratio, 2.9; p = 0.041). Patients above 35 years of age had more risk of anatomical failure (risk ratio, 3.5; p = 0.010). Clinical outcomes significantly improved regardless of anatomical failure (p < 0.001) and were not significantly different between unhealed and healed repairs (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Since patients with unhealed SLAP lesions had less clinical failure than patients with healed SLAP lesions, anatomical healing does not seem essential for better clinical outcome of SLAP II repair, especially in patients with higher healing failure risk (isolated SLAP repair, nonoverhead activities, and above 35 years of age). Therefore, we believe the indications of SLAP repair should be narrowed to avoid overtreatment. The Korean Orthopaedic Association 2018-09 2018-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6107812/ /pubmed/30174813 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios.2018.10.3.358 Text en Copyright © 2018 by The Korean Orthopaedic Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Nashikkar, Piyush Suresh Rhee, Sung-Min Desai, Chintan Vinod Oh, Joo Han Is Anatomical Healing Essential for Better Clinical Outcome in Type II SLAP Repair? Clinico-Radiological Outcome after Type II SLAP Repair |
title | Is Anatomical Healing Essential for Better Clinical Outcome in Type II SLAP Repair? Clinico-Radiological Outcome after Type II SLAP Repair |
title_full | Is Anatomical Healing Essential for Better Clinical Outcome in Type II SLAP Repair? Clinico-Radiological Outcome after Type II SLAP Repair |
title_fullStr | Is Anatomical Healing Essential for Better Clinical Outcome in Type II SLAP Repair? Clinico-Radiological Outcome after Type II SLAP Repair |
title_full_unstemmed | Is Anatomical Healing Essential for Better Clinical Outcome in Type II SLAP Repair? Clinico-Radiological Outcome after Type II SLAP Repair |
title_short | Is Anatomical Healing Essential for Better Clinical Outcome in Type II SLAP Repair? Clinico-Radiological Outcome after Type II SLAP Repair |
title_sort | is anatomical healing essential for better clinical outcome in type ii slap repair? clinico-radiological outcome after type ii slap repair |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6107812/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30174813 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios.2018.10.3.358 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nashikkarpiyushsuresh isanatomicalhealingessentialforbetterclinicaloutcomeintypeiislaprepairclinicoradiologicaloutcomeaftertypeiislaprepair AT rheesungmin isanatomicalhealingessentialforbetterclinicaloutcomeintypeiislaprepairclinicoradiologicaloutcomeaftertypeiislaprepair AT desaichintanvinod isanatomicalhealingessentialforbetterclinicaloutcomeintypeiislaprepairclinicoradiologicaloutcomeaftertypeiislaprepair AT ohjoohan isanatomicalhealingessentialforbetterclinicaloutcomeintypeiislaprepairclinicoradiologicaloutcomeaftertypeiislaprepair |