Arthroscopic cuff repair: footprint remnant preserving versus debriding rotator cuff repair of transtendinous rotator cuff tears with remnant cuff.
Remnant cuff
Remnant preserving rotator cuff repair
Repaired tendon quality
Tendon to tendon healing
Transtendinous rotator cuff tears
Journal
BMC musculoskeletal disorders
ISSN: 1471-2474
Titre abrégé: BMC Musculoskelet Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968565
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Apr 2024
17 Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
14
10
2023
accepted:
09
04
2024
medline:
19
4
2024
pubmed:
18
4
2024
entrez:
17
4
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In transtendinous full thickness rotator cuff tears (FTRCT) with remnant cuff, conventionally, cuff remnant of the greater tuberosity (GT) is debrided for better tendon to bone healing. However, larger cuff defect caused overtension on the repaired tendon. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and tendon integrity between remnant preserving and remnant debriding cuff repairs in the transtendinous FTRCT with remnant cuff. From March, 2012 to October, 2017, a total of 127 patients who had the transtendinous FTRCT with remnant cuff were enrolled in this study. Rotator cuff tears were repaired arthroscopically, with patients divided into two groups: group I (n = 63), where rotator cuff remnants were preserved during the repair, and group II (n = 64), where the remnants were debrided during the repair. Clinical outcomes were assessed at the last follow-up (minimum 2 years) using the UCLA score, ASES score, SST score, Constant Shoulder score, and range of motion (ROM). The analysis of structural integrity and tendon quality was performed using the Sugaya classification on postoperative MRI scans at 8 months after surgery. At the final follow-up, UCLA, ASES, SST, and CS scores significantly improved from preoperative values to postoperative (all p < 0.05): UCLA (I: 19.6 ± 6.0 to 31.7 ± 3.2, II: 18.0 ± 5.7 to 31.5 ± 3.2), ASES (I: 54.3 ± 10.7 to 86.5 ± 12.5, II: 18.0 ± 5.7 to 85.8 ± 12.4), SST (I: 5.6 ± 2.8 to 10.2 ± 2.0, II: 5.0 ± 2.9 to 10.1 ± 2.5), CS (I: 74.0 ± 17.2 to 87.8 ± 9.7, II: 62.0 ± 19.2 to 88.3 ± 6.2). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups (p > 0.05). Also, remnant preserving cuff repair yielded significantly better tendon quality on postoperative MRI (p < 0.05). The incidence of re-tear (Sugaya's Type IV and V) was not significantly different between the two groups (I:17% vs. II:19%; p = 0.053). Remnant preserving rotator cuff repairs, which facilitate tendon-to-tendon healing, are superior in terms of tendon quality and are the preferred option for transtendinous FTRCT. Retrospectively registered.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In transtendinous full thickness rotator cuff tears (FTRCT) with remnant cuff, conventionally, cuff remnant of the greater tuberosity (GT) is debrided for better tendon to bone healing. However, larger cuff defect caused overtension on the repaired tendon. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and tendon integrity between remnant preserving and remnant debriding cuff repairs in the transtendinous FTRCT with remnant cuff.
METHODS
METHODS
From March, 2012 to October, 2017, a total of 127 patients who had the transtendinous FTRCT with remnant cuff were enrolled in this study. Rotator cuff tears were repaired arthroscopically, with patients divided into two groups: group I (n = 63), where rotator cuff remnants were preserved during the repair, and group II (n = 64), where the remnants were debrided during the repair. Clinical outcomes were assessed at the last follow-up (minimum 2 years) using the UCLA score, ASES score, SST score, Constant Shoulder score, and range of motion (ROM). The analysis of structural integrity and tendon quality was performed using the Sugaya classification on postoperative MRI scans at 8 months after surgery.
RESULTS
RESULTS
At the final follow-up, UCLA, ASES, SST, and CS scores significantly improved from preoperative values to postoperative (all p < 0.05): UCLA (I: 19.6 ± 6.0 to 31.7 ± 3.2, II: 18.0 ± 5.7 to 31.5 ± 3.2), ASES (I: 54.3 ± 10.7 to 86.5 ± 12.5, II: 18.0 ± 5.7 to 85.8 ± 12.4), SST (I: 5.6 ± 2.8 to 10.2 ± 2.0, II: 5.0 ± 2.9 to 10.1 ± 2.5), CS (I: 74.0 ± 17.2 to 87.8 ± 9.7, II: 62.0 ± 19.2 to 88.3 ± 6.2). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups (p > 0.05). Also, remnant preserving cuff repair yielded significantly better tendon quality on postoperative MRI (p < 0.05). The incidence of re-tear (Sugaya's Type IV and V) was not significantly different between the two groups (I:17% vs. II:19%; p = 0.053).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Remnant preserving rotator cuff repairs, which facilitate tendon-to-tendon healing, are superior in terms of tendon quality and are the preferred option for transtendinous FTRCT.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Retrospectively registered.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38632573
doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07431-z
pii: 10.1186/s12891-024-07431-z
pmc: PMC11022446
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
302Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Am J Sports Med. 2006 Dec;34(12):1899-905
pubmed: 16870821
Am J Sports Med. 2011 Oct;39(10):2071-81
pubmed: 21610262
Am J Sports Med. 2012 Oct;40(10):2242-7
pubmed: 22926748
Orthop Clin North Am. 1987 Jul;18(3):361-72
pubmed: 3441361
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Jun;87(6):1229-40
pubmed: 15930531
Arthroscopy. 1993;9(6):611-6
pubmed: 8305096
Arthroscopy. 2012 May;28(5):628-35
pubmed: 22261136
Arthroscopy. 2002 May-Jun;18(5):519-26
pubmed: 11987064
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008 Mar;466(3):622-33
pubmed: 18264850
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010 May;92(5):1088-96
pubmed: 20439653
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 May;90(5):962-9
pubmed: 18451386
Am J Sports Med. 2015 Jun;43(6):1413-21
pubmed: 25825378
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2014 Dec;24(8):1367-74
pubmed: 24085654
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 May;89(5):953-60
pubmed: 17473131
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010 Mar;92(3):590-8
pubmed: 20194317
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Jun 5;95(11):965-71
pubmed: 23780533
Arthroscopy. 2010 Mar;26(3):302-9
pubmed: 20206038
Clin Sports Med. 2012 Oct;31(4):645-63
pubmed: 23040551
Arthroscopy. 1997 Apr;13(2):172-6
pubmed: 9127074
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992 Jun;74(5):713-25
pubmed: 1624486
Eur J Radiol. 2008 Oct;68(1):16-24
pubmed: 18511227
Arthroscopy. 2020 Jul;36(7):1834-1842
pubmed: 32272201
Am J Sports Med. 2010 Apr;38(4):664-71
pubmed: 20040768