PurposeThe optimum treatment strategy for the surgical management of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PTRCT) is evolving. In this study, two research questions were sought to be answered: “Does the repair technique for PTRCTs involving >50% of the tendon thickness have an effect on structural and functional outcomes of arthroscopic repair?” and “Is there a difference in outcomes of arthroscopically treated articular- and bursal-sided PTRCTs?”.MethodsA systematic review according to the PRISMA statement was conducted to identify all literature published reporting on outcomes of arthroscopic treatment of PTRCTs classified with the Ellman classification with minimum 2-year follow-up. Prospective randomized trials were eligible for quantitative synthesis. A total of 19 studies, published between 1999 and 2015, met the inclusion criteria of this systematic review. Two studies reporting outcomes of articular-sided PTRCTs with prospective randomized study design were included in quantitative synthesis calculations.ResultsArthroscopic repair of PTRCTs >50% thickness results in significant pain relief and good to excellent functional outcomes. When in situ repair was compared with repair of the tendon after completion to full-thickness RCT, there were no significant differences in functional or structural outcomes or complication rates. The best treatment method for low-grade PTRCTs remains unclear.ConclusionsThe repair technique (in situ repair versus repair of the tendon after completion to full-thickness RCT) did not significantly affect the outcomes for arthroscopic repair of PTRCTs >50% thickness. The current literature contains evidence for inferior outcomes and higher failure rates after arthroscopic debridement of bursal-sided compared to articular-sided PTRCTs, and some evidence suggests that repair of lower-grade bursal-sided tears may be beneficial over debridement.Level of evidenceIV. |
