Results of Open Versus Arthroscopic Method in Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

관혈적 방법과 관절경적 방법을 이용한 재발성 견관절 전방 불안정의 치료 결과

Purpose: To compare the results of open and arthroscopic method in recurrent anterior should erinstability. Materials and Methods: The 68 patients who have been taken the open or arthroscopic Bankartrepair for the period of Jan. 1995 to April. 2000. One group (23 patients) had elected an arthroscopic Bankart repair, the other group (45 patients) had chosen open stabilization. Patients were followed up12 to 63 months (ave. 34 months) after surgery. Results: We found 2 cases of subluxation out of open repair group, and then treated by conservative method. There were another 2 cases of dislocation and 2 cases of subluxation out of arthroscopicrepair group, and we have taken out 1 case of reoperation by open method. Using the functional scales by Rowe, the patients who have taken the open method posted at the average point of 87, while the arthroscopic method posted 85 points. Patients satisfaction points were 84.6 and 72.5 respectively. There were no criteria of statistically significant except stability and motion score. Conclusion: Open Bankart repair would be better in stability, and arthroscopic method in ROM gain. Proper patient selection based on physical examination and arthroscopic inspection to optimize the indications contributed to successful treatment.

목적: 관혈적방법과관절경적방법을이용하여재발성견관절전방불안정환자를수술후추시결과를비교하고자하였다. 대상및방법: 1995년1월부터2000년4월까지관혈적및관절경적Bankart repair를시행하고1년이상추시가가능한68명을대상으로하였으며, 23명은관절경적방법으로45명은관혈적방법으로수술을시행하였다. 추시기간은12개월에서64개월로평균34개월이었다. 결과: 관혈적수술을시행한환자들중2예에서아탈구가발생하여보존적인방법으로치료하였으며관절경적그룹에서는2예에서탈구, 2예에서아탈구가발생하여이중탈구된1예에서관혈적방법으로재수술을시행하였다. Rowe 등에의한기능적평가에서는관혈적그룹에서평균87 점이었고관절경적그룹에서평균85점이었다. 환자의주관적인만족도는관혈적그룹에서84.6 점이었고관절경적그룹에서72.5점이었다. 두그룹간의결과의통계분석상안정성과운동범위점수이외에는통계학적으로유의한차이는없었다.결론: 관혈적수술방법은안정도가높았고, 관절경적수술방법은견관절운동범위에장점이있었다. 견관절재발성전방불안정환자의수술적치료에있어서이학적검사및방사선학적검사, 진단적관절경에의해적절한수술방법을선택하는것이환자의예후에중요한요소가될 것이다.