4.3 Article

Vascularity of the supraspinatus tendon three months after repair: Characterization using contrast-enhanced ultrasound

期刊

JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY
卷 19, 期 1, 页码 73-80

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.04.004

关键词

-

资金

  1. Major League Baseball

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There has been limited in-vivo assessment of rotator cuff vascularity following repair. This study aims to characterize the vascularity of the shoulder 3 months following supraspinatus tendon repair. Methods: Twenty-nine patients (average age, 61.4 years) underwent Perflutren lipid microsphere contrast-enhanced shoulder ultrasound examinations 3 months after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Each shoulder was scanned at rest and following exercise using linear phased array 9-MHz transducer optimized to detect the contrast agent. Blood flow was quantified off-line using ultrasound imaging quantification and analysis software (QLAB, Philips, Andover, MA). Peak enhancement (vascular volume) and rate of rise (perfusion) were determined for 3 regions of interest: peribursal area, supraspinatus tendon, and anchor site. Results: Peak enhancement and rate of rise were greatest in the peribursal soft tissue and anchor site. Resting peak enhancement and rate of rise were significantly lower within the tendon compared to the other 2 regions (P<.001). Exercise resulted in increased enhancement and rate-of-rise to all 3 regions, but had a significant predilection towards increasing vascular volume within the peri-bursal region (P=.026). Conclusion: At 3 months following repair, the majority of blood flow to the repair is derived from the peribursal soft tissues and the anchor site. The tendon, particularly those with a defect at 3 months, is relatively avascular. Though limited by inclusion of only a single time point, this study introduces a new technique to quantify vascularity following supraspinatus repairs and suggests that the surrounding vascular milieu may play a role in tendon healing.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据