지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2023.9
- 수록면
- 276 - 286 (11page)
이용수
이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)
- 이 논문의 후속연구가 궁금하신가요?
- 연관 학술논문 또는 학술발표를 통해 보다 발전된 연구결과를 확인하실 수 있습니다.
- 이 논문의 연구 히스토리 확인하기
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Background: The transosseous anchorless repair (ToR) technique was recently introduced to avoid suture anchor-related problems. While favorable outcomes of the ToR technique have been reported, no previous studies on peri-implant cyst formation with the ToR technique exist. Therefore, this study compared the clinical outcomes and prevalence of peri-implant cyst formation between the ToR technique and the conventional transosseous equivalent technique using suture anchors (SA).
Methods: Cases with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) between 2016 and 2018 treated with the double-row suture bridge technique were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into ToR and SA groups. To compare clinical outcomes, 19 ToR and 57 SA cases with¬out intraoperative implant failure were selected using propensity score matching (PSM). While intraoperative implant failure rate was analyzed before PSM, retear rate, peri-implant cyst formation rate, and functional outcomes were compared after PSM.
Results: The intraoperative implant failure rate (ToR, 8% vs. SA, 15.3%) and retear rate (ToR, 5.3% vs. SA, 19.3%) did not differ between the two groups (all P>0.05). However, peri-implant cysts were not observed in the ToR group, while they were observed in 16.7% of the SA group (P=0.008). Postoperative functional outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups (all P>0.05).
Conclusions: The ToR technique produced comparable clinical outcomes to conventional techniques. Considering the prospect of potential additional surgeries, the absence of peri-implant cyst formation might be an advantage of ToR. Furthermore, ToR might reduce the medical costs related to suture anchors and, thereby, could be a useful option for ARCR.
Methods: Cases with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) between 2016 and 2018 treated with the double-row suture bridge technique were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into ToR and SA groups. To compare clinical outcomes, 19 ToR and 57 SA cases with¬out intraoperative implant failure were selected using propensity score matching (PSM). While intraoperative implant failure rate was analyzed before PSM, retear rate, peri-implant cyst formation rate, and functional outcomes were compared after PSM.
Results: The intraoperative implant failure rate (ToR, 8% vs. SA, 15.3%) and retear rate (ToR, 5.3% vs. SA, 19.3%) did not differ between the two groups (all P>0.05). However, peri-implant cysts were not observed in the ToR group, while they were observed in 16.7% of the SA group (P=0.008). Postoperative functional outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups (all P>0.05).
Conclusions: The ToR technique produced comparable clinical outcomes to conventional techniques. Considering the prospect of potential additional surgeries, the absence of peri-implant cyst formation might be an advantage of ToR. Furthermore, ToR might reduce the medical costs related to suture anchors and, thereby, could be a useful option for ARCR.
목차
INTRODUCTION
METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0