Christopher C Schmidt1, Bernard F Morrey2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Electronic address: schmidtc@upmc.edu. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The appropriate use criteria (AUC) were developed for full-thickness rotator cuff tears to determine when it is reasonable to recommend nonoperative care, partial repair/débridement, repair, reconstruction, or arthroplasty. The goal of this report was to interpret and summarize the results of the AUC process into clinically relevant terms. METHODS: Using the results of the AUC methodology, we systematically interpreted the clinical importance attributed to the various patient and pathologic variables. We then assessed the combination of considerations that would justify the various treatment options using "preference tables." RESULTS: A nonoperative program was appropriate if the patient had a positive response to conservative care. However, a repair could be maybe appropriate was also accepted. Rotator cuff repair was appropriate when conservative treatment failed in symptomatic patients. Reconstructive measures were recognized primarily in those with chronic massive tears. Most found arthroplasty maybe appropriate only in healthy patients, pseudoparalysis, and chronic massive tears. Surprisingly, neither factors that decreased healing nor adversely affected outcome had a strong influence on the panel's treatment recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The AUC process accounts for clinical experience and considers individual patient and pathologic characteristics of the condition. Overall, the outcome of this exercise does support the current practice for the management of rotator cuff tears (ie, repair of symptomatic tears). However, the minimal importance given to patient and pathologic considerations, well documented to influence outcome, prompts an ongoing effort to refine this important and clinically relevant process.
BACKGROUND: The appropriate use criteria (AUC) were developed for full-thickness rotator cuff tears to determine when it is reasonable to recommend nonoperative care, partial repair/débridement, repair, reconstruction, or arthroplasty. The goal of this report was to interpret and summarize the results of the AUC process into clinically relevant terms. METHODS: Using the results of the AUC methodology, we systematically interpreted the clinical importance attributed to the various patient and pathologic variables. We then assessed the combination of considerations that would justify the various treatment options using "preference tables." RESULTS: A nonoperative program was appropriate if the patient had a positive response to conservative care. However, a repair could be maybe appropriate was also accepted. Rotator cuff repair was appropriate when conservative treatment failed in symptomatic patients. Reconstructive measures were recognized primarily in those with chronic massive tears. Most found arthroplasty maybe appropriate only in healthy patients, pseudoparalysis, and chronic massive tears. Surprisingly, neither factors that decreased healing nor adversely affected outcome had a strong influence on the panel's treatment recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The AUC process accounts for clinical experience and considers individual patient and pathologic characteristics of the condition. Overall, the outcome of this exercise does support the current practice for the management of rotator cuff tears (ie, repair of symptomatic tears). However, the minimal importance given to patient and pathologic considerations, well documented to influence outcome, prompts an ongoing effort to refine this important and clinically relevant process.
Authors: David Kovacevic; Robert J Suriani; Brian M Grawe; Edward H Yian; Mohit N Gilotra; S Ashfaq Hasan; Umasuthan Srikumaran; Samer S Hasan; Frances Cuomo; Robert T Burks; Andrew G Green; Wesley M Nottage; Sai Theja; Hafiz F Kassam; Maarouf A Saad; Miguel A Ramirez; Rodney J Stanley; Matthew D Williams; Vidushan Nadarajah; Alexis C Konja; Jason L Koh; Andrew S Rokito; Charles M Jobin; William N Levine; Christopher C Schmidt Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2020-08-04 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Laurent Audigé; Heiner C C Bucher; Soheila Aghlmandi; Thomas Stojanov; David Schwappach; Sabina Hunziker; Christian Candrian; Gregory Cunningham; Holger Durchholz; Karim Eid; Matthias Flury; Bernhard Jost; Alexandre Lädermann; Beat Kaspar Moor; Philipp Moroder; Claudio Rosso; Michael Schär; Markus Scheibel; Christophe Spormann; Thomas Suter; Karl Wieser; Matthias Zumstein; Andreas M Müller Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Nicholas I Kennedy; George Sanchez; Sandeep Mannava; Márcio B Ferrari; Salvatore J Frangiamore; Matthew T Provencher Journal: Arthrosc Tech Date: 2017-09-25