Kyle Alpaugh1, Brian J Chilelli2, Siyan Xu3, Scott D Martin4. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A.. Electronic address: kalpaugh@partners.org. 2. Orthopedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Program, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A. 3. Novartis Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, New Jersey, U.S.A. 4. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A.; Orthopedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Program, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to systematically appraise the evidence on primary open and endoscopic abductor tendon repair. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed to (1) identify the demographic undergoing abductor tendon repair, (2) summarize the overall outcomes after primary surgical abductor tendon repair, (3) identify the type of tear most commonly encountered intraoperatively, (4) summarize the repair methods used, and (5) identify the published complication and tendon retear rates. RESULTS: A total of 8 articles were identified as eligible for inclusion. All studies were Level IV Evidence. Of the patients undergoing surgical repair, 90% were women. As assessed by a variety of outcome measures, most patients reported good to excellent functional outcomes and pain reduction after open or endoscopic repair. Intraoperatively, tears of the gluteus medius and partial-thickness tears were encountered most often. Tears involving both the gluteus medius and minimus occurred 29% of the time. Complication rates were low for both the open and endoscopic approaches. No tendon retears were documented after endoscopic repair, whereas the retear rate after open repair was 9%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing surgical repair for partial- and full-thickness tears are mostly women. Intraoperatively, tears almost always include the gluteus medius, with concomitant tearing of the gluteus minimus in approximately one-third of cases. Both open and endoscopic techniques are viable surgical approaches to repairing abductor tendon tears in the hip that produce good to excellent functional results and reduce pain; however, endoscopic repair appears to result in fewer postoperative complications including tendon retear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to systematically appraise the evidence on primary open and endoscopic abductor tendon repair. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed to (1) identify the demographic undergoing abductor tendon repair, (2) summarize the overall outcomes after primary surgical abductor tendon repair, (3) identify the type of tear most commonly encountered intraoperatively, (4) summarize the repair methods used, and (5) identify the published complication and tendon retear rates. RESULTS: A total of 8 articles were identified as eligible for inclusion. All studies were Level IV Evidence. Of the patients undergoing surgical repair, 90% were women. As assessed by a variety of outcome measures, most patients reported good to excellent functional outcomes and pain reduction after open or endoscopic repair. Intraoperatively, tears of the gluteus medius and partial-thickness tears were encountered most often. Tears involving both the gluteus medius and minimus occurred 29% of the time. Complication rates were low for both the open and endoscopic approaches. No tendon retears were documented after endoscopic repair, whereas the retear rate after open repair was 9%. CONCLUSIONS:Patients undergoing surgical repair for partial- and full-thickness tears are mostly women. Intraoperatively, tears almost always include the gluteus medius, with concomitant tearing of the gluteus minimus in approximately one-third of cases. Both open and endoscopic techniques are viable surgical approaches to repairing abductor tendon tears in the hip that produce good to excellent functional results and reduce pain; however, endoscopic repair appears to result in fewer postoperative complications including tendon retear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.
Authors: Connor R Crutchfield; Ajay S Padaki; Kurt S Holuba; Monica M Arney; Michaela J O'Connor; Travis J Menge; Thomas S Lynch Journal: Iowa Orthop J Date: 2021-12
Authors: David R Maldonado; Shawn Annin; Jeffery W Chen; Philip J Rosinsky; Jacob Shapira; Ajay C Lall; Benjamin G Domb Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2020-07-10
Authors: Shane J Nho; Jeffrey S Grzybowski; Ljiljana Bogunovic; Benjamin D Kuhns; Richard C Mather; Michael J Salata; Charles A Bush-Joseph Journal: Arthrosc Tech Date: 2016-05-02
Authors: Oliver Marin-Peña; Marc Tey-Pons; Luis Perez-Carro; Hatem G Said; Pablo Sierra; Pedro Dantas; Richard N Villar Journal: EFORT Open Rev Date: 2017-04-27
Authors: Darren de Sa; Jayson Lian; Andrew J Sheean; Kathleen Inman; Nicholas Drain; Olufemi Ayeni; Craig Mauro Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2018-09-21