BACKGROUND: There are numerous reports on the outcome of rotator cuff repair according to age. However, the results are conflicting and driven by univariate analysis, which is not free of confounding factors. HYPOTHESIS: Age does not affect the anatomical and functional outcomes of rotator cuff repair. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-one men and 96 women underwent rotator cuff repair at one institution and received computed tomography arthrography and functional evaluations at least 1 year after surgery. Various structural and clinical features according to age were evaluated. The correlation was assessed between age and outcomes, with adjustment for the preoperative score. RESULTS: Patient mean age was 60.0 +/- 8.7 years. The mean ages were higher in women, nonsmokers, and those with positive paradoxical abduction, lower level of sports activity, the presence of biceps injury, higher fatty degeneration in cuff muscles, inferior isokinetic muscle performance, bigger tear size, more retraction of tear, and symptomatic acromioclavicular arthritis. For the integrity of the repair, the mean age was higher in the retear group (31.1%) than in the intact group (68.9%)-that is, 63.7 +/- 7.5 and 58.4 +/- 8.7 years, respectively (P <.001). Only the Constant score exhibited a positive correlation with age after adjustment (P = .009). Univariate regression analysis revealed that a 0.313-point increment of Constant score could be expected for each year of age. CONCLUSION: On univariate analysis, older age was related with poor postoperative integrity and better functional improvement in Constant score. Multivariate regression revealed that age was not an independent determinant for anatomical or functional outcome whereas the tear retraction and fatty degeneration of the infraspinatus were independent factors for the integrity of repair and the presence of the paradoxical abduction and abduction torque of the unaffected shoulder for the Constant score.
BACKGROUND: There are numerous reports on the outcome of rotator cuff repair according to age. However, the results are conflicting and driven by univariate analysis, which is not free of confounding factors. HYPOTHESIS: Age does not affect the anatomical and functional outcomes of rotator cuff repair. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-one men and 96 women underwent rotator cuff repair at one institution and received computed tomography arthrography and functional evaluations at least 1 year after surgery. Various structural and clinical features according to age were evaluated. The correlation was assessed between age and outcomes, with adjustment for the preoperative score. RESULTS:Patient mean age was 60.0 +/- 8.7 years. The mean ages were higher in women, nonsmokers, and those with positive paradoxical abduction, lower level of sports activity, the presence of biceps injury, higher fatty degeneration in cuff muscles, inferior isokinetic muscle performance, bigger tear size, more retraction of tear, and symptomatic acromioclavicular arthritis. For the integrity of the repair, the mean age was higher in the retear group (31.1%) than in the intact group (68.9%)-that is, 63.7 +/- 7.5 and 58.4 +/- 8.7 years, respectively (P <.001). Only the Constant score exhibited a positive correlation with age after adjustment (P = .009). Univariate regression analysis revealed that a 0.313-point increment of Constant score could be expected for each year of age. CONCLUSION: On univariate analysis, older age was related with poor postoperative integrity and better functional improvement in Constant score. Multivariate regression revealed that age was not an independent determinant for anatomical or functional outcome whereas the tear retraction and fatty degeneration of the infraspinatus were independent factors for the integrity of repair and the presence of the paradoxical abduction and abduction torque of the unaffected shoulder for the Constant score.
Authors: Maristella F Saccomanno; Giuseppe Sircana; Gianpiero Cazzato; Fabrizio Donati; Pietro Randelli; Giuseppe Milano Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2015-07-22 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Benjamin B Rothrauff; Thierry Pauyo; Richard E Debski; Mark W Rodosky; Rocky S Tuan; Volker Musahl Journal: Tissue Eng Part B Rev Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 6.389
Authors: Jonah Hebert-Davies; Sharlene A Teefey; Karen Steger-May; Aaron M Chamberlain; William Middleton; Kathryn Robinson; Ken Yamaguchi; Jay D Keener Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: S Fitschen-Oestern; P Behrendt; E Martens; J Finn; J Schiegnitz; C Borzikowsky; A Seekamp; M Weuster; S Lippross Journal: J Orthop Date: 2019-08-14
Authors: Matthias V Wlk; Ashraf Abdelkafy; Michael Hexel; Christian Krasny; Nicolas Aigner; Roland Meizer; Franz Landsiedl Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-04-18 Impact factor: 4.342