Nuri Aydin1, Baris Kocaoglu, Osman Guven. 1. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Uskudar State Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. nuriaydin@hotmail.com
Abstract
HYPOTHESIS: Double-row rotator cuff repair leads to superior cuff integrity and clinical results compared with single-row repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study enrolled 68 patients with a full-thickness rotator cuff tear who were divided into 2 groups of 34 patients according to repair technique. The patients were followed-up for at least 2 years. The results were evaluated by Constant score. DISCUSSION: Despite the biomechanical studies and cadaver studies that proved the superiority of double-row fixation over single-row fixation, our clinical results show no difference in functional outcome between the two methods. It is evident that double-row repair is more technically demanding, expensive, and time-consuming than single-row repair, without providing a significant improvement in clinical results. RESULTS: Comparison between groups did not show significant differences. At the final follow-up, the Constant score was 82.2 in the single-row group and 78.8 in the double-row group. Functional outcome was improved in both groups after surgery, but the difference between the 2 groups was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up, arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with the double-row technique showed no significant difference in clinical outcome compared with single-row repair in small to medium tears. 2010 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
HYPOTHESIS: Double-row rotator cuff repair leads to superior cuff integrity and clinical results compared with single-row repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study enrolled 68 patients with a full-thickness rotator cuff tear who were divided into 2 groups of 34 patients according to repair technique. The patients were followed-up for at least 2 years. The results were evaluated by Constant score. DISCUSSION: Despite the biomechanical studies and cadaver studies that proved the superiority of double-row fixation over single-row fixation, our clinical results show no difference in functional outcome between the two methods. It is evident that double-row repair is more technically demanding, expensive, and time-consuming than single-row repair, without providing a significant improvement in clinical results. RESULTS: Comparison between groups did not show significant differences. At the final follow-up, the Constant score was 82.2 in the single-row group and 78.8 in the double-row group. Functional outcome was improved in both groups after surgery, but the difference between the 2 groups was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up, arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with the double-row technique showed no significant difference in clinical outcome compared with single-row repair in small to medium tears. 2010 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.