Five Year Follow up of Retrospective Cohort Comparing Structural and Functional Outcome of Arthroscopic Single-row versus Double-row Suture Bridge Repair of Large Posterosuperior Rotator Cuff Tear in Patients Less than or Equal to 70 Years | ||
The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery | ||
مقاله 6، دوره 9، شماره 4، مهر و آبان 2021، صفحه 391-398 اصل مقاله (430.28 K) | ||
نوع مقاله: RESEARCH PAPER | ||
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/abjs.2020.47883.2369 | ||
نویسندگان | ||
Vivek Pandey* 1؛ CJ Joseph1؛ Naveen J. Mathai1؛ Sandesh Madi1؛ Lakshmikanth H. Gowda1؛ Willems Jaap2 | ||
1Department of Orthopedics, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, India | ||
2Shoulder unit, Lairesse Kliniek, Valeriusplein, BG Amsterdam, The Netherlands | ||
چکیده | ||
Background: High re-tear rates after repairing large-sized posterosuperior rotator cuff tears remain a significant concern which may affect the clinical outcome. The most optimal type of repair (single versus double-row suture bridge) suited for large size tear remains debatable. Methods: In a retrospective cohort study with a minimum of five years follow up, the structural and functional outcome of 103 patients with large size cuff tear repaired with single row (SR) or double row suture bridge (DRSB) were evaluated. The structural outcome was assessed with ultrasonography whereas functional outcome was evaluated with Constant Murley (CM) and American shoulder elbow score (ASES). Results: There were 55 patients in the SR group and 48 patients in the DRSB group with a mean follow-up of 74.2 months (range, 60-96 months). While comparing the structural integrity in two groups, we found significantly lower retear rates in the DRSB group as compared to the SR group (10.4% vs. 32.7%; P=0.006). Also, there were more focal defects in the SR group (25.4%) than the DRSB group (8.3%). Overall, there was no significant difference in CM and ASES scores when the SR group was compared to DRSB. However, subgroup analysis between those with intact and retorn tendon revealed significant difference (P=0.0001) in the clinical scores. Conclusion: At a minimum of five years follow-up, the DRSB repair of large posterosuperior cuff tear resulted in superior structural healing over SR repair. Nevertheless, overall there was no significant functional difference between both the techniques. However, the functional outcome of the healed tendon subgroup was superior to retear tendon subgroup. Level of evidence: III | ||
کلیدواژهها | ||
Large size؛ Outcome؛ Posterosuperior؛ Repair؛ Rotator cuff tear؛ Single row؛ Suture bridge | ||
مراجع | ||
1. Nakamura H, Gotoh M, Mitsui Y, Honda H, Ohzono H, Shimokobe H, et al. Factors Affecting Clinical Outcome in Patients With Structural Failure After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair. Arthroscopy. 2016;32(5):732-9. 2. Yang J, Jr., Robbins M, Reilly J, Maerz T, Anderson K. The Clinical Effect of a Rotator Cuff Retear: A Metaanalysis of Arthroscopic Single-Row and Double- Row Repairs. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(3):733-41. 3. Kim HM, Caldwell JM, Buza JA, Fink LA, Ahmad CS, Bigliani LU, et al. Factors affecting satisfaction and shoulder function in patients with a recurrent rotator cuff tear. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(2):106-12. 4. Bisson L, Zivaljevic N, Sanders S, Pula D. A cost analysis of single-row versus double-row and suture bridge rotator cuff repair methods. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(2):487-93. 5. Boileau P, Brassart N, Watkinson DJ, Carles M, Hatzidakis AM, Krishnan SG. Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness tears of the supraspinatus: does the tendon really heal? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(6):1229-40. 6. Sugaya H, Maeda K, Matsuki K, Moriishi J. Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair. A prospective outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(5):953-60. 7. Paxton ES, Teefey SA, Dahiya N, Keener JD, Yamaguchi K, Galatz LM. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of failed repairs of large or massive rotator cuff tears: minimum ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(7):627-32. 8. Elia F, Azoulay V, Lebon J, Faraud A, Bonnevialle N, Mansat P. Clinical and anatomic results of surgical repair of chronic rotator cuff tears at ten-year minimum follow-up. Int Orthop. 2017;41(6):1219-26. 9. Heuberer PR, Smolen D, Pauzenberger L, Plachel F, Salem S, Laky B, et al. Longitudinal Long-term Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Follow-up After Single-Row Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Clinical Superiority of Structural Tendon Integrity. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(6):1283-8. 10. Cho NS, Rhee YG. The factors affecting the clinical outcome and integrity of arthroscopically repaired rotator cuff tears of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Surg. 2009;1(2):96-104. 11. Le BT, Wu XL, Lam PH, Murrell GA. Factors predicting rotator cuff retears: an analysis of 1000 consecutive rotator cuff repairs. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(5):1134-42. 12. Wu XL, Briggs L, Murrell GA. Intraoperative determinants of rotator cuff repair integrity: an analysis of 500 consecutive repairs. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(12):2771-6. 13. Agout C, Berhouet J, Bouju Y, Godeneche A, Collin P, Kempf JF, et al. Clinical and anatomic results of rotator cuff repair at 10 years depend on tear type. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(8):2490-7. 14. Lorbach O, Kieb M, Raber F, Busch LC, Kohn DM, Pape D. Three-dimensional evaluation of cyclic displacement in single-row and double-row rotator cuff reconstructions under static external rotation. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(1):153-62. 15. Apreleva M, Ozbaydar M, Fitzgibbons PG, Warner JJ. Rotator cuff tears: the effect of the reconstruction method on three-dimensional repair site area. Arthroscopy. 2002;18(5):519-26. 16. Park MC, Tibone JE, ElAttrache NS, Ahmad CS, Jun BJ, Lee TQ. Part II: Biomechanical assessment for a footprint-restoring transosseous-equivalent rotator cuff repair technique compared with a doublerow repair technique. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(4):469-76. 17. Koh KH, Kang KC, Lim TK, Shon MS, Yoo JC. Prospective randomized clinical trial of single- versus doublerow suture anchor repair in 2- to 4-cm rotator cuff tears: clinical and magnetic resonance imaging results. Arthroscopy. 2011;27(4):453-62. 18. Ma HL, Chiang ER, Wu HT, Hung SC, Wang ST, Liu CL, et al. Clinical outcome and imaging of arthroscopic single-row and double-row rotator cuff repair: a prospective randomized trial. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(1):16-24. 19. Hantes ME, Ono Y, Raoulis VA, Doxariotis N, Venouziou A, Zibis A, et al. Arthroscopic Single- Row Versus Double-Row Suture Bridge Technique for Rotator Cuff Tears in Patients Younger Than 55 Years: A Prospective Comparative Study. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(1):116-21. 20. Jeong JY, Park KM, Sundar S, Yoo JC. Clinical and radiologic outcome of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row versus transosseous equivalent repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018;27(6):1021-9. 21. Park JY, Lhee SH, Choi JH, Park HK, Yu JW, Seo JB. Comparison of the clinical outcomes of single- and double-row repairs in rotator cuff tears. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36(7):1310-6. 22. Xu C, Zhao J, Li D. Meta-analysis comparing singlerow and double-row repair techniques in the arthroscopic treatment of rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(2):182-8. 23. Goutallier D, Postel JM, Bernageau J, Lavau L, Voisin MC. Fatty muscle degeneration in cuff ruptures. Preand postoperative evaluation by CT scan. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(304):78-83. 24. Lim HK, Hong SH, Yoo HJ, Choi J-Y, Kim SH, Choi J-A, et al. Visual MRI grading system to evaluate atrophy of the supraspinatus muscle. Korean journal of radiology. 2014;15(4):501-7. 25. Fuchs B, Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Gerber C. Fatty degeneration of the muscles of the rotator cuff: assessment by computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999;8(6):599-605. 26. Cho NS, Yi JW, Lee BG, Rhee YG. Retear patterns after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row versus suture bridge technique. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(4):664-71. 27. Duquin TR, Buyea C, Bisson LJ. Which method of rotator cuff repair leads to the highest rate of structural healing? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(4):835-41. 28. Gerhardt C, Hug K, Pauly S, Marnitz T, Scheibel M. Arthroscopic single-row modified mason-allen repair versus double-row suture bridge reconstruction for supraspinatus tendon tears: a matched-pair analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(12):2777-85. 29. Mihata T, Watanabe C, Fukunishi K, Ohue M, Tsujimura T, Fujiwara K, et al. Functional and structural outcomes of single-row versus doublerow versus combined double-row and suturebridge repair for rotator cuff tears. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39(10):2091-8. 30. DeOrio JK, Cofield RH. Results of a second attempt at surgical repair of a failed initial rotator-cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66(4):563-7. 31. Gartsman GM, Drake G, Edwards TB, Elkousy HA, Hammerman SM, O’Connor DP, et al. Ultrasound evaluation of arthroscopic full-thickness supraspinatus rotator cuff repair: single-row versus double-row suture bridge (transosseous equivalent) fixation. Results of a prospective, randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22(11):1480-7. 32. Gwark JY, Sung CM, Na JB, Park HB. Outcomes of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair in Patients Who Are 70 Years of Age or Older Versus Under 70 Years of Age: A Sex- and Tear Size-Matched Case-Control Study. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(7):2045-53. 33. Gilat R, Atoun E, Cohen O, Tsvieli O, Rath E, Lakstein D, et al. Recurrent rotator cuff tear: is ultrasound imaging reliable? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018;27(7):1263-7. 34. McCormick F, Gupta A, Bruce B, Harris J, Abrams G, Wilson H, et al. Single-row, double-row, and transosseous equivalent techniques for isolated supraspinatus tendon tears with minimal atrophy: A retrospective comparative outcome and radiographic analysis at minimum 2-year followup. Int J Shoulder Surg. 2014;8(1):15-20. 35. Choi S, Kim MK, Kim GM, Roh YH, Hwang IK, Kang H. Factors associated with clinical and structural outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with a suture bridge technique in medium, large, and massive tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(11):1675-81. 36. Jeong HY, Kim HJ, Jeon YS, Rhee YG. Factors Predictive of Healing in Large Rotator Cuff Tears: Is It Possible to Predict Retear Preoperatively? Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(7):1693-700. 37. Hein J, Reilly JM, Chae J, Maerz T, Anderson K. Retear Rates After Arthroscopic Single-Row, Double-Row, and Suture Bridge Rotator Cuff Repair at a Minimum of 1 Year of Imaging Follow-up: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(11):2274-81. 38. Mascarenhas R, Chalmers PN, Sayegh ET, Bhandari M, Verma NN, Cole BJ, et al. Is double-row rotator cuff repair clinically superior to single-row rotator cuff repair: a systematic review of overlapping metaanalyses. Arthroscopy. 2014;30(9):1156-65. 39. Noyes MP, Ladermann A, Denard PJ. Functional Outcome and Healing of Large and Massive Rotator Cuff Tears Repaired With a Load-Sharing Rip-Stop Construct. Arthroscopy. 2017;33(9):1654-8. 40. Millett PJ, Warth RJ, Dornan GJ, Lee JT, Spiegl UJ. Clinical and structural outcomes after arthroscopic single-row versus double-row rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of level I randomized clinical trials. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(4):586-97. 41. Kartus J, Kartus C, Rostgard-Christensen L, Sernert N, Read J, Perko M. Long-term clinical and ultrasound evaluation after arthroscopic acromioplasty in patients with partial rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy. 2006;22(1):44-9. 42. Shi BY, Diaz M, Binkley M, McFarland EG, Srikumaran U. Biomechanical Strength of Rotator Cuff Repairs: A Systematic Review and Meta-regression Analysis of Cadaveric Studies. Am J Sports Med. 2018:363546518780928. 43. Nicholas SJ, Lee SJ, Mullaney MJ, Tyler TF, Fukunaga T, Johnson CD, et al. Functional Outcomes After Double-Row Versus Single-Row Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective Randomized Trial. Orthop J Sports Med. 2016;4(10):2325967116667398. 44. Carbonel I, Martinez AA, Calvo A, Ripalda J, Herrera A. Single-row versus double-row arthroscopic repair in the treatment of rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomized clinical study. Int Orthop. 2012;36(9):1877-83. 45. Okoroha KR, Mehran N, Duncan J, Washington T, Spiering T, Bey MJ, et al. Characterization of Rotator Cuff Tears: Ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Orthopedics. 2017;40(1):e124-e30. 46. Lee SC, Williams D, Endo Y. The Repaired Rotator Cuff: MRI and Ultrasound Evaluation. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2018;11(1):92-101. 47. Magee TH, Gaenslen ES, Seitz R, Hinson GA, Wetzel LH. MR imaging of the shoulder after surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168(4):925-8. 48. Motamedi AR, Urrea LH, Hancock RE, Hawkins RJ, Ho C. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in determining the presence and size of recurrent rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002; 11(1):6-10. 49. Schroder FF, Huis In’t Veld R, den Otter LA, van Raak SM, Ten Haken B, Vochteloo AJH. Metal artefacts severely hamper magnetic resonance imaging of the rotator cuff tendons after rotator cuff repair with titanium suture anchors. Shoulder Elbow. 2018;10(2):107-13. | ||
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 758 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 479 |