Clinical and Anatomical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Repair of Large Rotator Cuff Tears with Allograft Patch Augmentation: A Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial with a Long-term Follow-up.
Alloderm
Allograft
Arthroscopy
Footprint coverage
Rotator cuff tear
Journal
Clinics in orthopedic surgery
ISSN: 2005-4408
Titre abrégé: Clin Orthop Surg
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101505087
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
09
08
2021
revised:
13
10
2021
accepted:
14
10
2021
entrez:
10
6
2022
pubmed:
11
6
2022
medline:
14
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using human dermal matrix allograft augmentation has been widely used. We assessed the effect of acellular human dermal matrix augmentation after arthroscopic repair of large rotator cuff tears through a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial with a long-term follow-up. Sixty patients with large-sized rotator cuff tears were randomly assigned to two groups. Patients in the control group underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Allograft patch augmentation was additionally performed in the allograft group. All patients were subdivided into a complete coverage (CC) group or an incomplete coverage (IC) group according to footprint coverage after cuff repair. Constant and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores were assessed preoperatively and at final follow-up. Magnetic resonance imaging was also performed at the same time to evaluate the anatomical results. Forty-three patients were followed up for an average of 5.7 years. Clinical scores (Constant and ASES) increased significantly at the last follow-up in both groups. The increase in ASES score in the allograft group was statistically significantly greater than that in the control group. The degree of Constant score improvement did not differ significantly between the two groups. The retear rate was 9.1% in the allograft group, which was significantly lower than that in the control group (38.1%). In the control group, the CC subgroup had a statistically significantly lower retear rate (16.7%) than did the IC subgroup. There were no retear cases in the CC subgroup of the allograft group. Long-term follow-up of arthroscopic repair of large rotator cuff tears with allograft patch augmentation showed better clinical and anatomical results. Footprint coverage after rotator cuff repair was an important factor affecting the retear rate. If the footprint was not completely covered after rotator cuff repair, allograft patch augmentation may reduce the retear rate.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using human dermal matrix allograft augmentation has been widely used. We assessed the effect of acellular human dermal matrix augmentation after arthroscopic repair of large rotator cuff tears through a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial with a long-term follow-up.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Sixty patients with large-sized rotator cuff tears were randomly assigned to two groups. Patients in the control group underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Allograft patch augmentation was additionally performed in the allograft group. All patients were subdivided into a complete coverage (CC) group or an incomplete coverage (IC) group according to footprint coverage after cuff repair. Constant and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores were assessed preoperatively and at final follow-up. Magnetic resonance imaging was also performed at the same time to evaluate the anatomical results.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Forty-three patients were followed up for an average of 5.7 years. Clinical scores (Constant and ASES) increased significantly at the last follow-up in both groups. The increase in ASES score in the allograft group was statistically significantly greater than that in the control group. The degree of Constant score improvement did not differ significantly between the two groups. The retear rate was 9.1% in the allograft group, which was significantly lower than that in the control group (38.1%). In the control group, the CC subgroup had a statistically significantly lower retear rate (16.7%) than did the IC subgroup. There were no retear cases in the CC subgroup of the allograft group.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
Long-term follow-up of arthroscopic repair of large rotator cuff tears with allograft patch augmentation showed better clinical and anatomical results. Footprint coverage after rotator cuff repair was an important factor affecting the retear rate. If the footprint was not completely covered after rotator cuff repair, allograft patch augmentation may reduce the retear rate.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35685982
doi: 10.4055/cios21135
pmc: PMC9152903
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
263-271Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 by The Korean Orthopaedic Association.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Références
Am J Sports Med. 2011 Oct;39(10):2064-70
pubmed: 21737833
Am J Sports Med. 2012 Jan;40(1):141-7
pubmed: 22215726
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012 Aug;21(8):1072-9
pubmed: 22047788
Arthroscopy. 2016 Aug;32(8):1676-90
pubmed: 27157657
J Orthop Surg Res. 2018 Jan 03;13(1):1
pubmed: 29298726
Arthroscopy. 2007 Jun;23(6):675.e1-4
pubmed: 17560485
Arthroscopy. 2016 Sep;32(9):1752-60
pubmed: 27062012
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999 Nov-Dec;8(6):599-605
pubmed: 10633896
Arthroscopy. 2010 Mar;26(3):393-403
pubmed: 20206051
Int J Shoulder Surg. 2012 Apr;6(2):36-44
pubmed: 22787332
Arthroscopy. 2012 Jan;28(1):8-15
pubmed: 21978432
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012 Jun;98(4 Suppl):S1-8
pubmed: 22595255
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Dec;22(12):1650-5
pubmed: 23850308
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015 Feb;23(2):530-41
pubmed: 25573661
Z Orthop Unfall. 2016 Oct;154(5):504-512
pubmed: 27327123
Arthroscopy. 2006 Dec;22(12):1360.e1-5
pubmed: 17157738
Am J Sports Med. 2017 Jul;45(8):1755-1761
pubmed: 28319431
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012 Feb;21(2):251-65
pubmed: 22244069
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Apr;19(3):467-76
pubmed: 20189415
Am J Sports Med. 2012 Apr;40(4):786-93
pubmed: 22307079
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 May;89(5):953-60
pubmed: 17473131
Am J Sports Med. 2014 Apr;42(4):869-76
pubmed: 24496508
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Mar;19(2 Suppl):104-9
pubmed: 20188275
Arch Plast Surg. 2013 Jul;40(4):374-9
pubmed: 23898434
Arthroscopy. 2015 Aug;31(8):1459-65
pubmed: 25891222
Arch Plast Surg. 2015 May;42(3):316-20
pubmed: 26015887
Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2020 Oct;13(5):561-571
pubmed: 32720101
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Jul;(304):78-83
pubmed: 8020238
Arthroscopy. 2008 Jan;24(1):20-4
pubmed: 18182197
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2010 Oct;25(8):751-8
pubmed: 20580140