SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Düzce Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 3

Short-Term Results of Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression and Acromioplasty

Artroskopik Subakromiyal Dekompresyon ve Akromiyoplasti Uygulanan Hastaların Kısa Dönem Sonuçları

Yasin Emre KAYA
Tacettin AYANOĞLU
Pages
353–357
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The overall meanpreperative ASES score was 38.8 (ranging from 36.6 to 41.8).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the arthroscopic surgery results of cases with isolated subacromialimpingement syndrome (SIS) that do not respond to conservative treatment.Material and Methods: 44 patients who had arthroscopic subacromial decompression and acromiplasty due to SISbetween 2015 and 2018, were retrospectively analyzed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For the patients, preoperative and postoperative The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder(ASES) Scores were measured.Results: Forty-four patients with a mean follow-up of 26.4 months (ranging from 24 to 35 months; SD: 7.3) and a meanage of 51.4 (ranging from 39 to 55; SD: 6.96) were reached.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The overall meanpreperative ASES score was 38.8 (ranging from 36.6 to 41.8).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the arthroscopic surgery results of cases with isolated subacromialimpingement syndrome (SIS) that do not respond to conservative treatment.Material and Methods: 44 patients who had arthroscopic subacromial decompression and acromiplasty due to SISbetween 2015 and 2018, were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with isolated subacromial impingement syndrome whodid not respond to conservative treatment including drugs, physiotherapy, exercises and subacromial steroid injectionswere included. For the patients, preoperative and postoperative The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder(ASES) Scores were measured.Results: Forty-four patients with a mean follow-up of 26.4 months (ranging from 24 to 35 months; SD: 7.3) and a meanage of 51.4 (ranging from 39 to 55; SD: 6.96) were reached. Thirty (68%) of the patients were female and fourteen(32%) were male. There were no significant differences between groups according to the age, sex, and follow-up time(p>0.50). There were type 3 acromion in total of 7 patients and type 2 acromion in 18 patients. The overall meanpreperative ASES score was 38.8 (ranging from 36.6 to 41.8). And, the mean postoperaive ASES score was 84.9(ranging from 76.2 to 88.3).Conclusion: The short-term clinical results of subacromial decompression and acromioplasty in patients who do notrespond to conservative treatment has successfull results that support literature knowledge.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, konservatif tedaviye yanıt vermeyen izole subakromiyal sıkışma sendromu (SSS) olan vakaların artroskopik cerrahi sonuçlarını değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: 2016-2018 yılları arasında SSS'e bağlı artroskopik subakromiyal dekompresyon ve akromiplasti olan ve düzenli takiplere gelen 44 hasta retrospektif olarak incelendi. NSIAD'ler, fizyoterapi, egzersizler ve subakromiyal steroid enjeksiyonları dahil konservatif tedaviye yanıt vermeyen izole subakromiyal sıkışma sendromlu hastalar dahil edildi. Hastaların ameliyat öncesi ve sonrası Amerikan Omuz ve Dirsek Cerrahları Omuz (ASES) Skorları ölçüldü. Bulgular: Ortalama takip süresi 2,4 ay (24-35 ay arasında değişen; SS: 7,3) ve yaş ortalaması 51,4 (39-55; SS: 6,96) olan kırk dört hastaya ulaşıldı. Hastaların 30'u (% 68) kadın, 14'ü (% 32) erkekti. Gruplar arasında yaşa, cinsiyete ve takip süresine göre anlamlı fark yoktu (p> 0,50). Toplam 7 hastada tip 3 akromiyon, 18 hastada tip 2 akromiyon vardı. Genel ortalama hazırlayıcı ASES skoru 38,8 idi (36,6 ile 41,8 arasında). Ortalama postoperatif ASES skoru 84,9 idi (76,2 ile 88,3 arasında). Sonuç: Konservatif tedaviye yanıt vermeyen hastalarda subakromiyal dekompresyon ve akromioplastinin kısa dönem klinik sonuçları literatür bilgisini destekleyen başarılı sonuçlara sahiptir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KAYA, Y. E., AYANOĞLU, T. (2022). Short-Term Results of Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression and Acromioplasty. Düzce Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 3, 353–357. https://ajindex.com/articles/494697

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Roddy E, Zwierska I, Hay EM, Jowett S, Lewis M, Stevenson K, et al. SUPPORT trial team. Subacromial impingement syndrome and pain: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of exercise and corticosteroid injection (the SUPPORT trial). BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014; 15(1): 81
  2. Neer CS 2nd. Anterior acromioplasty for the chronic impingement syndrome in the shoulder: a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1972; 54(1): 41-50
  3. Bigliani LU, Levine WN. Subacromial impingement syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1997; 79(12): 1854- 68
  4. Kanatli U, Ayanoğlu T, Aktaş E, Ataoğlu MB, Özer M, Çetinkaya M. Grade of coracoacromial ligament degeneration as a predictive factor for impingement syndrome and type of partial rotator cuff tear. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016; 25(11): 1824-8
  5. Bigliani BU, Morrison ES, April EW. The morphology of the acromion and its relationship to rotator cuff tears. Orthop Trans. 1986; 10: 216
  6. Pappas GP, Blemker SS, Beaulieu CF, McAdams TR, Whalen ST, Gold GE. In vivo anatomy of the Neer and Hawkins sign positions for shoulder impingement. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006; 15(1): 40-9
  7. Marwan A, Galvin. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for subacromial impingement syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 93: 229-36
  8. Roberts CS, Davila JN, Hushek SG, Tillett ED, Corrigan TM. Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of the subacromial space in the impingement sign positions. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002; 11(6): 595-9
  9. Liaghat B, Ussing A, Petersen BH, Andersen HK, Barfod KW, Jensen MB, et al. Supervised training compared with no training or self-training in patients with subacromial pain syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021; 27: S0003-9993(21)00318-X
  10. Haahr JP, Ostergaard S, Dalsgaard J, Norup K, Frost P, Lausen S, et al. Exercises versus arthroscopic decompression in patients with subacromial impingement: a randomised, controlled study in 90 cases with a one year follow up. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005; 64(5): 760-4
  11. Davis AD, Kakar S, Moros C, Kaye EK, Schepsis AA, Voloshin I: Arthroscopic versus open acromioplasty: A metaanalysis. Am J Sports Med. 2010; 38(3): 613-8
  12. Hardy V, Rony L, Bachler J, Favard L, Hubert L. Does anterior arthroscopic acromioplasty modify critical shoulder angle? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2021; 16: 102936
  13. Michener LA, McClure PW, Karduna AR. Anatomical and biomechanical mechanisms of subacromial impingement syndrome.