Early Postoperative Outcomes Between Arthroscopic and Mini-open Repair for Rotator Cuff Tears

The purpose of this study was to compare early postoperative outcomes between arthroscopic and mini-open repair for rotator cuff tears smaller than 3 cm to determine whether arthroscopic repair causes less postoperative pain and allows for faster recovery of range of motion. Sixty patients scheduled for rotator cuff repair were randomized to either an arthroscopic repair group (30 patients) or a mini-open repair group (30 patients). Pain level, range of motion, shoulder stiffness, and complications were compared between the 2 groups from immediately postoperatively to 6 months postoperatively.Although no statistically significant difference was found in mean visual analog scale pain scores between the 2 groups during the 6 months postoperatively, mean visual analog scale pain score was significantly lower in the arthroscopic repair group compared with the mini-open repair group at postoperative days 1 and 2 (P=.02 and P=.04, respectively). No significant difference existed in postoperative range of motion, duration of rehabilitation, shoulder stiffness, or complications between the 2 groups; however, the use of additional analgesics in the arthroscopic repair group was significantly lower than in the mini-open repair group (P=.03).Arthroscopic and mini-open repair had equivalent clinical outcomes in the early postoperative period. The hypothesis that arthroscopic repair would cause less postoperative pain and allow faster recovery of range of motion in the early postoperative period compared with mini-open repair was not supported.     

Mid-Term Outcomes of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objective

The effectiveness of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients remains a controversial topic. This study investigates the mid-term outcomes of ARCR in RA patients and identifies the factors influencing clinical efficacy.

Methods

This retrospective study enrolled RA patients with small or medium rotator cuff tears (RCTs) between February 2014 and February 2019. Visual Analog Scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Constant–Murley scores were collected at each follow-up time. Ultimately, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and X-ray were employed to assess rotator cuff integrity and progression of shoulder bone destruction, respectively. Statistical methods used two-way repeated-measures ANOVA or generalized estimation equations.

Results

A total of 157 patients were identified and divided into ARCR (n = 75) and conservative treatment (n = 82) groups. ARCR group continued to be divided into small tear (n = 35) and medium tear (n = 40) groups. At the final, all scores were better in ARCR group than in the conservative treatment group (p < 0.05). A radiographic evaluation of the final follow-up demonstrated that the progression rate in ARCR group (18.67%) was significantly lower than that of the conservative treatment group (39.02%, p < 0.05). In the comparison of the small tear and medium tear groups, all scores increased significantly after surgery (p < 0.05), and the final follow-up scores were better than preoperative scores (p < 0.05) but worse than those of the 6-month postoperative follow-up (p < 0.05). Comparison between the two groups revealed that all scores of the small tear group were significantly better than those of the medium tear group at 6-month postoperative follow-up (p < 0.05). Although the scores of small tear group remained better than those of the medium group at the final postoperative follow-up, the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Radiographic assessment of the final follow-up demonstrated that the progression rate in the small tear group (8.57%) was significantly lower than that in the medium group (27.50%, p < 0.05), and the retear rate of small tear group (14.29%) was significantly lower than that of the medium tear group (35.00%, p < 0.05).

Conclusion

ARCR could effectively improve the quality of life for RA patients with small or medium RCTs, at least in the medium term. Despite the progression of joint destruction in some patients, postoperative retear rates were comparable to those in the general population. ARCR is more likely to benefit RA patients than conservative treatment.     

肩峰撞击征合并肩袖损伤的关节镜下治疗

目的分析关节镜下肩峰减压成形术及肩袖修复的临床效果。方法自2005年初始,我院对11例肩峰撞击征并肩袖损伤行关节镜下肩峰减压成形术,部分行肩袖修复术,其中男5例,女6例,年龄21～57岁,平均40岁,8例无外伤史,3例有外伤史。患者均有肩关节疼痛、肌肉萎缩、活动受限、上举困难、疼痛反射弧阳性、撞击注射试验阳性,Neer征阳性;5例有患侧卧位痛。X线提示肱骨大结节骨赘9例和肩峰骨刺2例,A—H间隙距离变小,小于1．0cm8例、小于0．5cm3例。MRI扫描均示肩袖结构T1为强信号,如关节积液T2相强信号。关节镜检查可见肩袖大撕裂（30～50mm）4例,中撕裂（10～30mm）5例,小撕裂（小于10mm）2例。行关节镜下肩峰下减压成形术,其中8例行缝合锚钉肩袖修复术。分别在术前及最终随访时采用美国肩肘外科医师（American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons,ASES）和Constant—Murley评分进行功能评估。结果术后随访22．5个月（13～34个月）。患者手术前平均ASES评分为62．4分（47～76分）,VAS评分平均为5．8分（3～8分）,Constant—Murley评分为66．7分（42～79分）,平均外展35．5°（30°～50°）,平均外旋为28．4°（0°～45°）;终末随访时平均ASES评分为94．6分（79～100分）,其中VAS评分为0．6分（0～2分）,Constant—Murley评分为93．6分（77～100分）,肩关节外展160°（80°～180°）,平均外旋30．2°（20°～55°）。8例患者冈上、下肌萎缩恢复,ASES评分优良率为81．8％,Constant—Murley评分优良率为90．9％。术后各项评分均存在显著性差异（ASES：P〈0．001,t一12．324;VAS：P〈0．001,t=14．765;外展：P〈0．001,t=15．236;外旋：P〈0．01,t=7．967;Constant—Murley：P〈0.001,t=16．647）。结论a）肩峰撞击征、肩袖损伤是关节镜手术的适应证;b）对肩袖单纯修复是不够的,必须同时解决撞击因素;c）不宜将肩峰切除过多,以免发生骨折;d）尽管镜下手术技术难度较大,但镜下视野广、创伤小、术后及早进行功能锻炼,功能可以得到很好恢复,故镜下进行肩袖损伤、肩峰成形等手术应值得提倡。     

The Accessory Posteromedial Portal Revisited: Utility for Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair is a technically challenging procedure. Accessory arthroscopic portals have been described that allow for optimal suture anchor placement, suture management, and knot tying. We describe here the usefulness of an accessory posteromedial portal that facilitates direct suture retrieval through the posterior aspect of a rotator cuff tear. This portal is created approximately 4 to 5 cm medial to the posterolateral corner of the acromion and 2 cm inferior to the scapular spine. The accessory posteromedial portal is especially useful when a retracted tear of the infraspinatus or teres minor is encountered. Because these tendons retract in a posterior and medial direction, the accessory posteromedial portal places the tendon-penetrating device in an ideal position for suture passage through the posterior portion of the rotator cuff tear. This portal also allows placement of margin convergence sutures for large U-shaped or L-shaped tears by permitting a direct “hand-off” of the suture to or from a second penetrating device that is placed through a standard anterior portal. If multiple suture anchors are required (as in the case of large or massive cuff tears, or when double-row fixation is employed), sutures can be pulled out through the accessory posteromedial portal to facilitate suture management.     

Clinical and Radiological Evaluation after Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Using Suture Bridge Technique

Background

We retrospectively assessed the clinical outcomes and investigated risk factors influencing retear after arthroscopic suture bridge repair technique for rotator cuff tear through clinical assessment and magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA).

Methods

Between January 2008 and April 2011, sixty-two cases of full-thickness rotator cuff tear were treated with arthroscopic suture bridge repair technique and follow-up MRA were performed. The mean age was 56.1 years, and mean follow-up period was 27.4 months. Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed using range of motion, Korean shoulder score, Constant score, and UCLA score. Radiological outcome was evaluated with preoperative and follow-up MRA. Potential predictive factors that influenced cuff retear, such as age, gender, geometric patterns of tear, size of cuff tear, acromioplasty, fatty degeneration, atrophy of cuff muscle, retraction of supraspinatus, involved muscles of cuff and osteolysis around the suture anchor were evaluated.

Results

Thirty cases (48.4%) revealed retear on MRA. In univariable analysis, retear was significantly more frequent in over 60 years age group (62.5%) than under 60 years age group (39.5%; p = 0.043), and also in medium to large-sized tear than small-sized tear (p = 0.003). There was significant difference in geometric pattern of tear (p = 0.015). In multivariable analysis, only age (p = 0.036) and size of tear (p = 0.030) revealed a significant difference. The mean active range of motion for forward flexion, abduction, external rotation at the side and internal rotation at the side were significantly improved at follow-up (p < 0.05). The mean Korean shoulder score, Constant score, and UCLA score increased significantly at follow-up (p < 0.01). The range of motion, Korean shoulder score, Constant score, and UCLA score did not differ significantly between the groups with retear and intact repairs (p > 0.05). The locations of retear were insertion site in 10 cases (33.3%) and musculotendinous junction in 20 cases (66.7%; p = 0.006).

Conclusions

Suture bridge repair technique for rotator cuff tear showed improved clinical results. Cuff integrity after repair did not affect clinical results. Age of over 60 years and size of cuff tear larger than 1 cm were factors influencing rotator cuff retear after arthroscopic suture bridge repair technique.