MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4313886843 · doi:10.1097/corr.0000000000002520

High Acromial Slope and Low Acromiohumeral Distance Increase the Risk of Retear of the Supraspinatus Tendon After Repair

2022· article· en· W4313886843 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas Caffard, Desdemona Kralewski, Marius Ludwig, Daniel Dornacher, Michael Fuchs, Thomas Kappe, Heiko Reichel, Mirco Sgroi

Notice bibliographique

RevueClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueShoulder Injury and Treatment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineRotator cuffAcromionTendonTearsSurgerySagittal planeOdds ratioCoronal planeAnatomyInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Retearing of the supraspinatus (SSP) tendon after repair is relatively common, but its cause is rarely clear. Although the role of acromion morphology and glenoid orientation in the pathogenesis of primary SSP tendon tears have frequently been analyzed, their association with the risk of rerupture of a repaired SSP tendon is poorly understood. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is acromial morphology associated with the risk of retear after SSP tendon repair? (2) Is there an association between inclination and version of the glenoid and the odds for retear of the SSP tendon after repair? (3) Are there differences in outcome scores between patients who had intact cuff repairs and those who had retears? METHODS: Between August 2012 and December 2015, we treated 92 patients for SSP tendon tears; all of these patients were considered for inclusion in the present study. We considered patients with complete tear of the SSP that was reconstructed with a double-row repair and a minimum follow-up of 2 years as potentially eligible. Based on these criteria, 28% (26 of 92) were excluded because they had a partial rupture and did not receive a double-row reconstruction. A further 9% (eight of 92) were excluded because of missing planes or slices (such as sagittal, axial, or frontal) on MRI, and another 3% (three of 92) were lost before the minimum study follow-up interval or had incomplete datasets, leaving 60% (55 of 92) for inclusion in the present analysis. All included patients had a minimum follow-up of 2 years; follow-up with MRI occurred at a mean duration of 2.3 ± 0.4 years postoperatively. All patients were asked to complete the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index and Oxford Shoulder Scores, and they underwent MRI of the operated-on shoulder. Preoperative true AP radiographs and MR images of the affected shoulders were retrospectively assessed by measuring the acromiohumeral interval, critical shoulder angle, acromial slope, acromial tilt, acromial index, lateral acromial angle, and glenoid version and inclination. The patients also underwent acromioplasty, in which the underface of the acromion was flattened. To rule out any change in the above parameters because of acromioplasty, these parameters were compared using preoperative and postoperative MR images and showed no difference. In addition, the tendon integrity and quality on postoperative MRI were analyzed independently of one another by the same two observers using the Sugaya and Castricini classifications, accounting for atrophy and fatty degeneration of the SSP muscle. To assess interobserver reliability, the two observers took measurements independently from each other. They were orthopaedic residents who completed a training session before taking the measurements. All measurements had excellent intrarater (Cronbach alpha 0.996 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99 to 1.00; p > 0.01) and interrater (interrater correlation coefficient 0.975 [95% CI 0.97 to 0.98]; p > 0.01) reliabilities. To answer the study's first question, SSP integrity on postoperative MRI was compared with acromial morphologic parameters measured on preoperative AP radiographs and MR images. To answer the second question, the postoperative integrity and quality of the SSP tendon were correlated with glenoid inclination and glenoid version. To answer our third question, we compared outcome scores between patients with intact SSP tendons and those with reruptured SSP tendons. To investigate any correlation among the acromial morphology, glenoid orientation, and postoperative outcomes, a binomial logarithmic regression analysis was performed. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine cutoff points for the radiologic parameters that showed a correlation in the binomial regression analysis. RESULTS: After controlling for potentially confounding variables such as acromioplasty or preoperative fatty infiltration as well as muscle atrophy, the only morphological parameters associated with a higher risk (adjusted odds ratio) of SSP tendon rerupture were the acromiohumeral interval (adjusted OR 0.9 [95% CI 0.9 to 0.99]; p < 0.01) and acromial slope (adjusted OR 1.4 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.8]; p < 0.01). The critical shoulder angle, acromial tilt, acromial index, and lateral acromial angle were not associated with the risk of rerupture. The cutoff values for acromial slope and acromiohumeral interval were 24.5° and 7.4 mm, respectively. Patients with an acromiohumeral interval smaller than 7.4 mm or an acromial slope greater than 24.5° had higher odds (acromiohumeral interval: OR 11 [95% CI 2 to 46]; p = 0.01 and acromial slope: OR 9 [95% CI 2 to 46]; p = 0.04) for rerupture of the SSP. No difference was found between patients with intact SSP tendons and those with reruptured SSP tendons in terms of glenoid inclination (6° ± 4° versus 6° ± 3°, mean difference 0.8° [-1° to 3°]; p < 0.48) and glenoid version (-2° ± 3° versus -3° ± 3°, mean difference 1° [-1° to 3°]; p < 0.30). No difference was found between the intact and reruptured SSP groups regarding clinical outcomes (Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index: 98 ± 2 versus 97 ± 3, mean difference 0.73 [95% CI -0.30 to 0.31]; p = 0.96; Oxford Shoulder Score: 26 ± 13 versus 23 ± 10, mean difference 2.80 [95% CI -4.12 to 9.72]; p = 0.41). CONCLUSION: The preoperative acromiohumeral interval and acromial slope are associated with SSP tendon rerupture after repair. Conversely, the critical shoulder angle, acromial tilt, lateral acromial angle, and acromial index had no association with the postoperative outcome. Additionally, glenoid inclination and version were not associated with the rerupture rate after SSP tendon repair. A detailed analysis of the acromiohumeral interval and acromial slope is recommended in clinical practice in patients undergoing SSP tendon repair. Surgeons should consider measuring the acromiohumeral interval and acromial slope preoperatively when performing SSP repair, especially in the context of planned acromioplasties. Future studies should investigate the role of acromioplasty during SSP repair in patients with a pathologic acromial slope and acromiohumeral interval. In this context, it should be determined whether a more-radical acromioplasty could reduce the risk of rerupture of the SSP in these patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,010

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,030
Tête enseignante GPT0,373
Écart entre enseignants0,342 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations11
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueClinical Orthopaedics and Related ResearchMême sujetShoulder Injury and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207