BACKGROUND: To address persisting controversy in the literature concerning the efficacy of arthroscopic compared to open acromioplasty, a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the treatment effect after both approaches. HYPOTHESIS: The final clinical outcomes will be the same after both open and arthroscopic acromioplasty. However, the arthroscopic technique results in faster recovery and less postoperative morbidity as reflected by faster return to work and decreased hospital stays. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We performed our search of published English language literature using PubMed. We also searched the proceedings from 4 major orthopaedic meetings convened from 2000 to 2007. Furthermore, the reference sections of all relevant articles were reviewed for pertinent studies and presentations. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria that directly compared arthroscopic versus open acromioplasty with minimum follow-up of 1 year. The analysis focused on 1-year clinical outcome and included comparison of the objective 100-point score, hospital stay, time until return to work, operative time, and complications. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in clinical outcomes or complications for the 2 groups. However, open acromioplasty was associated with longer hospital stays (2.3 days, P = .05) and a greater length in time until return to work (65.1 days) compared with the arthroscopic technique (48.6 days) (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic and open acromioplasty have equivalent ultimate clinical outcomes, operative times, and low complication rates. However, arthroscopic acromioplasty results in faster return to work and fewer hospital inpatient days compared with the open technique.
BACKGROUND: To address persisting controversy in the literature concerning the efficacy of arthroscopic compared to open acromioplasty, a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the treatment effect after both approaches. HYPOTHESIS: The final clinical outcomes will be the same after both open and arthroscopic acromioplasty. However, the arthroscopic technique results in faster recovery and less postoperative morbidity as reflected by faster return to work and decreased hospital stays. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We performed our search of published English language literature using PubMed. We also searched the proceedings from 4 major orthopaedic meetings convened from 2000 to 2007. Furthermore, the reference sections of all relevant articles were reviewed for pertinent studies and presentations. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria that directly compared arthroscopic versus open acromioplasty with minimum follow-up of 1 year. The analysis focused on 1-year clinical outcome and included comparison of the objective 100-point score, hospital stay, time until return to work, operative time, and complications. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in clinical outcomes or complications for the 2 groups. However, open acromioplasty was associated with longer hospital stays (2.3 days, P = .05) and a greater length in time until return to work (65.1 days) compared with the arthroscopic technique (48.6 days) (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic and open acromioplasty have equivalent ultimate clinical outcomes, operative times, and low complication rates. However, arthroscopic acromioplasty results in faster return to work and fewer hospital inpatient days compared with the open technique.
Authors: Juha Paloneva; Vesa Lepola; Jaro Karppinen; Jari Ylinen; Ville Äärimaa; Ville M Mattila Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 3.717
Authors: Ron Diercks; Carel Bron; Oscar Dorrestijn; Carel Meskers; René Naber; Tjerk de Ruiter; Jaap Willems; Jan Winters; Henk Jan van der Woude Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 3.717