Randomized, controlled trial of multimodal shoulder injection or intravenous patient-controlled analgesia after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of postoperative pain control and adverse effects of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) and multimodal shoulder injection after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Methods

Seventy patients scheduled for elective arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were prospectively randomized to receive either IV PCA or multimodal shoulder injections. Postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, and other adverse effects were assessed at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after surgery. Use of rescue analgesics and antiemetics, level of satisfaction, and cost for both modalities were recorded.

Results

Pain was better controlled in the multimodal shoulder injection group at 2 h postoperatively (P = 0.001). However, the use of additional analgesics was greater in the multimodal shoulder injection group during 12–48 h after surgery (P < 0.001). The incidence of nausea within 12–24 h after surgery in the multimodal shoulder injection group (5.7 %) was less significant compared with that in the IV PCA group (31.4 %, P = 0.012), but no difference in overall incidence of the use of rescue antiemetics was observed between the groups (n.s.). No differences in adverse effects were noted between the groups. Patient satisfaction also showed no differences (n.s.). Costs required for both modalities were $20.3 for the multimodal shoulder injection and $157.8 for the IV PCA.

Conclusions

Multimodal shoulder injection is a safe and effective modality for management of pain after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Considering the expense and need of special devices for IV PCA, multimodal shoulder injection may be an effective and safe alternative to IV PCA for postoperative analgesia after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Level of evidence

Randomized, controlled trial, Level I.     

Subacromial patient-controlled analgesia with ropivacaine provides effective pain control after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

Purpose

To investigate the postoperative analgesic effect of subacromial patient-controlled analgesia (SA-PCA) with ropivacaine in comparison with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Methods

Sixty patients were prospectively randomized into one of the two types of analgesics for 48?h after the operation. In the SA-PCA group, patients received 0.5% ropivacaine at a rate of 2?ml/h with a patient-controlled bolus dose of 2?ml. In the IV-PCA group, patients received intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Pain relief was regularly assessed using visual analog scale (VAS) for 48?h, and side effects were noted.

Results

The postoperative pain VAS at 1?h after the operation was lower for the SA-PCA group (4.3?±?2.7) than for the IV-PCA group (6.3?±?2.6, P?=?0.009). The frequency of requested bolus doses by patients in the IV-PCA (19?±?19) was higher than in the SA-PCA (7?±?10, P?=?0.04). Rescue opioid or NSAID requirements were not different. More patients in the IV-PCA (17/30) experienced nausea than in the SA-PCA (7/30, P?=?0.03). Patient satisfaction was higher in the SA-PCA than in the IV-PCA [6.7 (3–10) vs. 5.6 (0–8), P?=?0.04]. The mean total venous plasma concentration of ropivacaine at 8 and 24?h was below the maximum tolerated venous plasma concentration, and symptoms of systemic toxicity were not noted during 48?h in the SA-PCA.

Conclusions

The analgesic effect of subacromial patient-controlled analgesia with ropivacaine was better than intravenous analgesia during the immediate postoperative period with fewer side effects.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic study, Level I.     

Early versus delayed rehabilitation following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: A systematic review

Background. Early passive range of motion (ROM) following arthroscopic cuff repair is thought to decrease postoperative stiffness and improve functionality. However, early aggressive rehabilitation may compromise repair integrity. Our purpose was to perform a systematic review to determine if there are differences between early and delayed rehabilitation after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in terms of clinical outcomes and healing. Methods. We performed a literature search with the terms ‘arthroscopic rotator cuff’, ‘immobilization’, ‘early’, ‘delayed’, ‘late’, and ‘rehabilitation’ using PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE. Selection criteria included: level I/II evidence ≤ 6 months in duration, comparing early versus delayed rehabilitation following arthroscopic repair. Data regarding demographics, sample sizes, duration, cuff pathology, surgery, rehabilitation, functional outcomes, pain, ROM and anatomic assessment of healing were analyzed. PRIMSA criteria were followed. Results. We identified six articles matching our criteria. Three reported significantly increased functional scores within the first 3–6 months with early rehabilitation compared to the delayed group, only one of which continued to observe a difference at a final follow-up of 15 months. Four articles showed improved ROM in the first 3–6 months post-operatively with early rehabilitation. One noted transient differences in pain scores. Only one study noted significant differences in ROM at final follow-up. No study reported any significant difference in rates of rotator cuff re-tear. However, two studies noted a trend towards increased re-tear with early rehabilitation that did not reach significance. This was more pronounced in studies including medium-large tears. Conclusions. Early rehabilitation after arthroscopic cuff repair is associated with some initial improvements in ROM and function. Ultimately, similar clinical and anatomical outcomes between groups existed at 1 year. While there was no significant difference between groups in anatomic failure of the repaired cuff, there may be a trend towards increased re-tear with larger tears.     

Current concepts in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

The interest in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has increased exponentially over the last 5 years. Although the operative technique of repair continues to evolve, there are now several studies reporting excellent results after arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears. In this review, we focus on new concepts and techniques related to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair that have been recently introduced.     

Humeral head osteonecrosis following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

Humeral head chondrolysis and osteonecrosis of the glenoid have been reported; however, there is no report to date about humeral head osteonecrosis following arthroscopic shoulder procedure. We report a case of osteonecrosis of the humeral head following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair what we believe is probably secondary to disruption of its blood supply after placement of multiple metallic suture anchors. The surgical records were also reviewed in an attempt to identify the cause of the humeral head osteonecrosis.     

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy is not useful after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

Purpose

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is known to accelerate the healing of musculoskeletal tissue. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that ESWT stimulates rotator cuff healing after arthroscopic repair.

Methods

Seventy-one consecutive patients with a small- to large-sized rotator cuff tear underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The patients were randomized into two groups: 35 patients underwent ESWT at 6 weeks after surgery (ESWT group) and 36 patients did not (control group). Cuff integrity was evaluated with computed tomographic arthrography at 6 months after surgery. Constant and UCLA scores were measurable outcomes.

Results

All patients were available for a minimum one-year follow-up. The mean age of the ESWT and control groups was 59.4 (SD: 7.7) and 58.6 years (SD: 7.8) (n.s.). There were no significant differences in tear size and repair method between the two groups (n.s.). The mean Constant and UCLA scores, respectively, increased from 54.6 to 90.6 (P < 0.001) and from 18.5 to 27.4 (P < 0.001) in the ESWT group, and from 58.9 to 89.3 (P < 0.001) and 18.5 to 27.4 in the control group. Computed tomographic arthrography was performed in 26 patients from the ESWT group and 24 from the control group, and cuff integrity was maintained in 46 out of 50 patients. Definite re-tear was observed in two patients of the ESWT group and four of the controls. There were no complications associated with ESWT.

Conclusion

This study failed to prove that ESWT stimulates rotator cuff healing after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Additional ESWT after rotator cuff repair could theoretically be advantageous, and it was proven to be safe in this study.

Level of evidence

II.     

Outcomes of combined arthroscopic rotator cuff and labral repair

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tears, Bankart lesions, and superior labral anterior posterior lesions commonly occur in isolation, but there is a subgroup of patients who experience combined injuries. Prior studies have excluded such patients as confounding groups. HYPOTHESIS: In patients with combined lesions of the labrum and rotator cuff, arthroscopic repair of both lesions will restore range of motion and stability and provide good clinical results. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of a series of patients with combined rotator cuff and labral (Bankart or superior labral anterior posterior) lesions treated arthroscopically. RESULTS: Thirty patients (average age, 47.8 years) with combined rotator cuff and labral lesions were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 2.7 years (range, 24-54 months). Sixteen patients had Bankart lesions and 14 patients had SLAP lesions. Significant improvements in forward flexion (20.5 degrees, P = .005), external rotation (9.0 degrees, P = .008), and internal rotation (2 vertebral levels, P = .016) were observed. The mean L'Insalata and American Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores for all patients were 92.9 and 94.3, respectively. Twenty-seven (90%) patients reported satisfaction as good to excellent, and 23 of 30 (77%) returned to their preinjury level of athletics. Two patients suffered recurrent rotator cuff tears. CONCLUSION: In patients with rotator cuff and labral lesions, arthroscopic treatment of both lesions yields good clinical outcomes, restoration of motion, and a high degree of patient satisfaction.     

MR imaging after rotator cuff repair: full-thickness defects and bursitis-like subacromial abnormalities in asymptomatic subjects

Objective. To determine the prevalence and extent of residual defects or retears and bursitis-like subacromial abnormalities on MR images after rotator cuff repair in asymptomatic subjects, and to define the clinical relevance of these findings. Design and patients. Fourteen completely asymptomatic patients and 32 patients with residual symptoms were investigated 27–53 months (mean 39 months) after open transosseous reinsertion of the rotator cuff. Coronal T2-weighted turbo spin-echo and turbo STIR or T2-weighted fat-suppressed MR images were obtained. The prevalence and extent of residual defects or retears of the rotator cuff and bursitis-like subacromial abnormalities were determined. Results. Residual defects or retears were detected in three (21%) and bursitis-like abnormalities in 14 (100%) of the 14 asymptomatic patients. Fifteen (47%) residual defects or retears and 31 (97%) bursitis-like abnormalities were diagnosed in the 32 patients with residual symptoms. The size of the residual defects/retears was significantly smaller in the asymptomatic group (mean 8 mm, range 6–11 mm) than in the symptomatic group (mean 32 mm, range 7–50 mm) (t-test, P=0.001). The extent of the bursitis-like subacromial abnormalities did not significantly differ (t-test, P>0.05) between asymptomatic (mean 28×3 mm) and symptomatic patients (mean 32×3 mm). Conclusion. Small residual defects or retears (<1 cm) of the rotator cuff are not necessarily associated with clinical symptoms. Subacromial bursitis-like MR abnormalities are almost always seen after rotator cuff repair even in patients without residual complaints. They may persist for several years after rotator cuff repair and appear to be clinically irrelevant. Received: 19 November 1999 Revision requested: 7 February 2000 Revision received: 28 February 2000 Accepted: 14 March 2000     

All arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs

The arthroscopic operation for repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears is successful and has the advantages ofglenohumeral joint inspection, treatment of intra-articular lesions, smaller incisions, no deltoid detachment, less soft tissue dissection, less pain, and more rapid rehabilitation. However, these advantages must be balanced against the technical difficulty of the method, which limits its application to surgeons skilled in both open and arthroscopic shoulder operations. This article contains many technical pearls to, as much as is possible, simplify and improve all arthroscopic cuff repair.     

关节镜下肩袖损伤修补术后早期运动和制动对肩关节功能的影响

目的 探讨早期康复被动运动和制动对关节镜下肩袖损伤修补术后肩关节功能的影响.方法 采用回顾性病例对照研究分析2016年1月至2017年12月上海交通大学医学院附属新华医院收治的78例肩袖损伤患者临床资料,其中男36例,女42例;年龄35～78岁[(62.7 ±3.2)岁].中度撕裂(1～3 cm)36例,小撕裂(<1 ...     

Single versus double-row repair of the rotator cuff

Purpose

Several techniques for arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff defects have been introduced over the past years. Besides established techniques such as single-row repairs, new techniques such as double-row reconstructions have gained increasing interest. The present article therefore provides an overview of the currently available literature on both repair techniques with respect to several anatomical, biomechanical, clinical and structural endpoints.

Methods

Systematic literature review of biomechanical, clinical and radiographic studies investigating or comparing single- and double-row techniques. These results were evaluated and compared to provide an overview on benefits and drawbacks of the respective repair type.

Results

Reconstructions of the tendon-to-bone unit for full-thickness tears in either single- or double-row technique differ with respect to several endpoints. Double-row repair techniques provide more anatomical reconstructions of the footprint and superior initial biomechanical characteristics when compared to single-row repair. With regard to clinical results, no significant differences were found while radiological data suggest a better structural tendon integrity following double-row fixation.

Conclusion

Presently published clinical studies cannot emphasize a clearly superior technique at this time. Available biomechanical studies are in favour of double-row repair. Radiographic studies suggest a beneficial effect of double-row reconstruction on structural integrity of the reattached tendon or reduced recurrent defect rates, respectively.