切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华关节外科杂志(电子版)

中华关节外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (04) : 571 -576. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-134X.2023.04.017

临床经验

体外冲击波疗法辅助治疗肩袖修补术后关节僵硬
吴俊贤, 曾俊杰, 许有银, 苑博†()   
  1. 100123　北京，民航总医院骨科
  • 收稿日期:2022-06-12 出版日期:2023-08-01
  • 通信作者: 苑博

Effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on post-operative shoulder stiffness after rotator cuff suture

Junxian Wu, Junjie Zeng, Youyin Xu, Bo Yuan†()   

  1. Department of 0rthopedics, Civil Aviation General Hospital, Peking University, Beijing 100123, China
  • Received:2022-06-12 Published:2023-08-01
  • Corresponding author: Bo Yuan
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

吴俊贤, 曾俊杰, 许有银, 苑博. 体外冲击波疗法辅助治疗肩袖修补术后关节僵硬[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 571-576.

Junxian Wu, Junjie Zeng, Youyin Xu, Bo Yuan. Effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on post-operative shoulder stiffness after rotator cuff suture[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Joint Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(04): 571-576.

目的

探讨体外冲击波(ESWT)辅助康复训练治疗肩袖修补术后关节僵硬的疗效。

方法

回顾性收集2016年3月至2021年6月北京民航总医院41例肩袖修补术后关节僵硬患者的临床资料，根据是否行ESWT分为冲击波组与非冲击波组，收集包括肩关节活动度(前屈、外展、外旋、体侧内旋)、治疗前及治疗后肩关节Constant-Murley评分、加州大学洛杉矶分校肩关节评分(UCLA)、视觉模拟评分(VAS)。通过两独立因素t检验、秩和检验比较两组治疗前基础资料差异及治疗前与治疗3个月肩关节活动度差异，通过重复测量方差分析比较两组治疗2周、1个月、3个月Constant-Murley评分、UCLA评分、VAS评分差异。

结果

冲击波组治疗3个月肩关节前屈、外旋、外展活动度以及Constant评分、UCLA评分、VAS评分为(149.3±12.7)°、(124.6±4.1)°、(42.4±2.5)°、(88.4±3.3)、(30.1±1.9)、(1.9±0.5)，较治疗前(106.7±9.6)°、(77.2±4.9)°、(25.6±5.1)°、(68.6±2.1)、(17.7±2.4)、(6.5±0.9)明显改善(t＝－13.907、－38.526、－7.572、－15.450，F＝723.354、492.503、318.293；均为P<0.05)，并且治疗3个月肩关节外展及外旋活动度、UCLA评分均较非冲击波组的(120.7±6.5)°、(37.5±7.0)°、(28.9±1.3)更优(t＝2.361、3.278，F＝4.937；均为P<0.05)，两组前屈活动度、Constant评分及VAS评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

体外冲击波辅助训练可有效改善肩袖修补术后关节僵硬的关节活动度及关节功能评分，并在改善外旋及外展活动度上较传统手法疗效更佳。

关键词: 回旋套损伤, 体外冲击波疗法, 关节镜检查
Objective

To explore the effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy(ESWT) on post-operative joint stiffness after treated with rotator cuff suture.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted in the patient who suffered from shoulder stiffness after treated with rotator cuff suture in the Civil Aviation General Hospital from March 2016 to June 2021. Forty-one patients were enrolled in this study, the patients were divided into ESWT group and non-EWST group, and the range of motion of shoulder joint(flexion, abduction, lateral rotation, internal rotation), before operation and at two weeks, one month and three months after operation, Constant-Murley score and University of California, Los Angeles score(UCLA) and visual analogue scale(VAS) were collected. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to analyze the data of Constant-Murley, UCLA and VAS scores. Two independent sample t test was used to compare range of motion of shoulder before surgery and at three months after surgery.

Results

flexion, abduction, lateral rotation, Constant-Murley, UCLA and VAS score of EWST group at three months after surgery were as followed: (149.3±12.7)°, (124.6±4.1)°, (42.4±2.5)°, (88.4±3.3), (30.1±1.9), and (1.9±0.5), which were significantly better than preoperative ones [ (106.7±9.6)°, (77.2±4.9)°, (25.6±5.1)°, (68.6±2.1), (17.7±2.4), (6.5±0.9)]( t=-13.907, -38.526, -7.572, -15.450; F=723.354, 492.503, 318.293; all P<0.05), and abduction, external rotation and UCLA score at three months after surgery were statistically better than those of non-ESWT group (120.7±6.5)°, (37.5±7.0)°, (28.9±1.3)(t=2.361, 3.278, F=4.937, all P<0.05).

Conclusion

ESWT is an effective way to improve the range of motion and functional scores on the patient who suffered from postoperative shoulder stiffness after rotator cuff suture, which is also better than traditional rehabilitation.

Key words: Rotator cuff injury, Extracorporeal shock wave therapy, Arthroscopy
表1 两组基础资料比较
Table 1 General information of patients
分组Groups 例数Case number 脂肪浸润分级Fatty infiltration degree 年龄[岁，(±s)] Age
Ⅰ级 Ⅱ级 Ⅲ级 Ⅳ级
冲击波组EWST group 27 8 10 6 3 77±7
非冲击波组Non-EWST group 14 4 5 3 2 78±7
F值   Z＝－0.553 t＝0.728
P值   >0.05 >0.05
分组Groups 例数Case number 撕裂程度Tear degree 身体质量指数[kg/m2, (±s)] Body mass index
小型Mild 中型Moderate 大型Large 巨大型Huge
冲击波组EWST group 27 4 8 8 7 27±3
非冲击波组Non-EWST group 14 2 4 6 2 27±3
F值   Z＝－0.286 t＝－0.467
P值   >0.05 >0.05
表2 两组治疗前后肩关节活动度比较[°，(±s)]
Table 2 Range of motion of shoulder in two groups before treatment and three months after treatment
分组Groups 例数Case number 治疗前Before treatment 治疗后3个月Three months after treatment
前屈Anteflexion 外展Abduction 外旋External rotation 前屈Anteflexion 外展Abduction 外旋External rotation
冲击波组EWST group 27 106.7±9.6 77.2±4.9 25.6±5.1 149.3±12.7 124.6±4.1 42.4±2.5
非冲击波组Non-EWST group 14 104.6±13.2 76.8±4.2 23.6±5.0 142.5±14.1 120.7±6.5 37.5±7.0
t值   0.561 0.284 1.197 1.557 2.361 3.278
P值   >0.05 >0.05 >0.05 >0.05 0.023 <0.01
表3 两组患者治疗前后肩关节评分比较(±s)
Table 3 Comparison of functional scores between the two groups before and after treatment
分组Groups 例数Case number Constant-Murley评分
治疗前Before treatment 治疗后2周Two weeks after treatment 治疗后1个月One month after treatment 治疗后3个月Three months after treatment
冲击波组EWST group 27 68.6±2.1 76.4±3.2 84.1±2.4 88.4±3.3
非冲击波组Non-EWST group 14 67.4±1.3 72.1±2.3 82.6±2.4 86.6±3.2
F值   3.514 14.234 3.275 2.293
P值   >0.05 <0.01 >0.05 >0.05
分组Groups 例数Case number UCLA
治疗前Before treatment 治疗后2周Two weeks after treatment 治疗后1个月One month after treatment 治疗后3个月Three months after treatment
冲击波组EWST group 27 17.7±2.4 21.9±2.3 26.3±1.8 30.1±1.9
非冲击波组Non-EWST group 14 17.1±2.6 19.8±1.7 23.1±1.3 28.9±1.3
F值   0.610 7.587 22.290 4.937
P值   >0.05 0.016 <0.001 0.045
分组Groups 例数Case number VAS
治疗前Before treatment 治疗后2周Two weeks after treatment 治疗后1个月One month after treatment 治疗后3个月Three months after treatment
冲击波组EWST group 27 6.5±0.9 3.9±0.9 3.0±0.9 1.9±0.5
非冲击波组Non-EWST group 14 6.6±1.5 4.7±0.9 3.3±1.0 2.3±0.8
F值   0.016 6.158 0.881 2.489
P值   >0.05 0.028 >0.05 >0.05
图1 体外冲击波治疗前后患侧肩关节MRI改变。图A体外冲击波治疗前可见肌腱周围渗出明显；图B治疗3个月可见渗出较前明显减少
Figure 1 MRI changes before and after extracorporeal shock wave therapy(ESWT). A shows significant exudation around tendon before ESWT; B shows the exudation significantly reduced after three months of treatment
[1]
Bainbridge P. Wound healing and the role of fibroblasts[J]. J Wound Care, 2013, 22(8): 407-408, 410-412.
[2]
王珂杰，徐鹏，丁文鸽，等. 肩关节镜下360°关节囊松解治疗原发性冻结肩的中期疗效[J/CD]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(1): 6-10.
[3]
Lee WC, Ng GY, Zhang ZJ, et al. Changes on tendon stiffness and clinical outcomes in athletes are associated with patellar tendinopathy after eccentric exercise[J]. Clin J Sport Med, 2020, 30(1): 25-32.
[4]
朱昌娥，魏嵘，章赛吉，等. 体外冲击波治疗疼痛性肩关节挛缩症的Meta分析[J]. 中国组织工程研究，2017, 21(28): 4585-4592.
[5]
Chung SW, Huong CB, Kim SH, et al. Shoulder stiffness after rotator cuff repair: risk factors and influence on outcome[J]. Arthroscopy, 2013, 29(2): 290-300.
[6]
Tauro JC. Stiffness and rotator cuff tears: incidence, arthroscopic findings, and treatment results[J]. Arthroscopy, 2006, 22(6): 581-586.
[7]
Parnes N, DeFranco M, Wells JH, et al. Complications after arthroscopic revision rotator cuff repair[J]. Arthroscopy, 2013, 29(9): 1479-1486.
[8]
Cofield RH. Rotator cuff disease of the shoulder[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1985, 67(6): 974-979.
[9]
Ha JW, Kim H, Kim SH. Effects of steroid injection during rehabilitation after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair[J]. Clin Shoulder Elb, 2021, 24(3): 166-171.
[10]
Kang S, Yoon JS, Lee JY, et al. Long－term local PDGF delivery using porous microspheres modified with heparin for tendon healing of rotator cuff tendinitis in a rabbit model[J]. Carbohydr Polym, 2019, 209: 372-381.
[11]
陈锦富，朱天飞，常崇斐，等. 冻结肩病理改变及过氧化物酶体增殖剂激活受体－γ激动剂治疗作用的研究[J]. 中华骨与关节外科杂志，2020, 13(8): 663-670.
[12]
Speed CA. Extracorporeal shock－wave therapy in the management of chronic soft－tissue conditions[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2004, 86(2): 165-171.
[13]
苏睿，李航，王奇，等. 体外冲击波联合银质针治疗糖尿病合并粘连性肩关节囊炎的临床研究[J]. 中国疼痛医学杂志，2021, 27(3): 221-224.
[14]
Saldiran TÇ, Yazgan P, Akgöl AC, et al. Radial shock-wave therapy for frozen shoulder patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a pilot trial comparing two different energy levels[J]. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 2022, 58(3): 412-422.
[1] 纪小孟, 刘璠, 唐晓波, 卞为伟, 董佩龙, 刘振鲁. 两种手术方式治疗肩袖撕裂合并粘连性肩关节囊炎[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 561-567.
[2] 韩燕鸿, 潘建科, 罗明辉, 黄和涛, 曹厚然, 李想, 曾令烽, 梁桂洪, 陈红云, 刘军, 杨伟毅. 肩袖撕裂修复术后腱－骨愈合影响因素的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 239-244.
[3] 蔡雨琦, 史尉利, 陶立元, 曹建夫, 崔国庆, 杨渝平. 支持带松解联合外侧成形治疗髌骨外侧过度挤压综合征[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 186-192.
[4] 李帝均, 王斌. 肩袖损伤修复的生物材料选择及动物模型评价[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 118-124.
[5] 王旭, 钱航, 刘军, 时志斌, 党晓谦, 刘瑞宇. 肱骨近端骨折合并肩袖损伤对半肩关节置换术后的影响[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 8-16.
[6] 张骏, 李强, 孟柏屹, 李成宇. 关节镜松解联合肩袖修复治疗肩袖损伤合并继发冻结肩[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 1-7.
[7] 夏传龙, 迟健, 丛强, 连杰, 崔峻, 陈彦玲. 富血小板血浆联合关节镜治疗半月板损伤的临床疗效[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 877-881.
[8] 马鹏程, 刘伟, 张思平. 股骨髋臼撞击综合征关节镜手术中闭合关节囊的疗效影响[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 653-662.
[9] 肖志满, 龚煜, 谢景凌, 刘斌伟. 上下肢关节镜手术后患者下肢深静脉血栓发生的对比研究[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 601-606.
[10] 邢阳, 何爱珊, 康焱, 杨子波, 孟繁钢, 邬培慧. 前交叉韧带单束联合前外侧结构重建的Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 508-519.
[11] 刘延子, 王维军, 韩向东, 田学东. 保留残余腱束与残端重建前交叉韧带后外侧束[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 439-442.
[12] 邬春虎, 马玉海, 陈长松, 尹华东, 朱晓峰, 何剑星, 刘彧. 冲击波联合富血小板血浆对骨关节炎软骨损伤的疗效[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 334-339.
[13] 薛清佩. 玻璃酸钠注射对半月板撕裂患者疗效的影响[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 288-291.
[14] 周新, 张孝华, 周述清, 杨博文, 罗辑, 张中卒, 喻雅婷. 不同手术方式治疗不可修复型肩袖损伤效果的Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 232-242.
[15] 王普, 秦江辉, 陈东阳, 杨献峰, 蒋青. 核磁共振肩关节参数评估冈上肌腱损伤程度[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 173-178.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号