Caiqi Xu1, Jinzhong Zhao2, Dingfeng Li1. 1. Department of Arthroscopy Surgery, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Arthroscopy Surgery, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: zhaojinzhong@vip.163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tears are among the most common shoulder injuries and can be a source of persistent pain, disability, and decreased range of motion and strength. Our hypothesis was to conduct a meta-analysis of recently published studies to compare the clinical results of a double-row technique with the results of a single-row technique for different tear sizes. METHODS: A search was performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ovid databases. All randomized and quasi-randomized clinical trials that reported the outcome of single-row repair and double-row repair techniques were included in our meta-analysis. Two subgroups were set according to the tear size. The outcomes were the Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, UCLA score, re-tear rate, range of motion, and muscle strength. RESULTS: We included 9 studies in this meta-analysis, 5 of which were randomized prospective studies. There was a statistically significant difference in favor of double-row repair for the overall ASES score, re-tear rate, and internal rotation range of motion. In subgroup 2 (tear size > 30 mm in the anteroposterior dimension), double-row techniques produced better outcomes than single-row techniques. There were no statistically significant differences in the overall Constant score, UCLA score, external rotation and forward elevation range of motion, or muscle strength. CONCLUSION: Double-row rotator cuff repair techniques have a significantly lower re-tear rate, higher ASES score, and greater range of motion of internal rotation compared with single-row repair techniques. Especially in those rotator cuff tears with a size >30 mm, the double-row technique is recommended for repair. Crown
BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tears are among the most common shoulder injuries and can be a source of persistent pain, disability, and decreased range of motion and strength. Our hypothesis was to conduct a meta-analysis of recently published studies to compare the clinical results of a double-row technique with the results of a single-row technique for different tear sizes. METHODS: A search was performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ovid databases. All randomized and quasi-randomized clinical trials that reported the outcome of single-row repair and double-row repair techniques were included in our meta-analysis. Two subgroups were set according to the tear size. The outcomes were the Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, UCLA score, re-tear rate, range of motion, and muscle strength. RESULTS: We included 9 studies in this meta-analysis, 5 of which were randomized prospective studies. There was a statistically significant difference in favor of double-row repair for the overall ASES score, re-tear rate, and internal rotation range of motion. In subgroup 2 (tear size > 30 mm in the anteroposterior dimension), double-row techniques produced better outcomes than single-row techniques. There were no statistically significant differences in the overall Constant score, UCLA score, external rotation and forward elevation range of motion, or muscle strength. CONCLUSION: Double-row rotator cuff repair techniques have a significantly lower re-tear rate, higher ASES score, and greater range of motion of internal rotation compared with single-row repair techniques. Especially in those rotator cuff tears with a size >30 mm, the double-row technique is recommended for repair. Crown
Authors: Stephen W Linderman; Ioannis Kormpakis; Richard H Gelberman; Victor Birman; Ulrike G K Wegst; Guy M Genin; Stavros Thomopoulos Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2015-05-25 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Kathleen A Derwin; Sambit Sahoo; Alexander Zajichek; Gregory Strnad; Kurt P Spindler; Joseph P Iannotti; Eric T Ricchetti Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2018-10-11 Impact factor: 3.019