Jong Pil Yoon1, Seok Won Chung2, Jae Yoon Kim3, Byung Joo Lee1, Hyung-Sub Kim1, Ju Eun Kim1, Jung Hyun Cho4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyungpook National University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea smilecsw@gmail.com. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chung-Ang University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The high failure rate after surgical repair of massive rotator cuff tears is a consistent problem. PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with bone marrow stimulation and patch augmentation in patients with massive rotator cuff tears. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: This study included 21 patients who underwent bone marrow stimulation and patch augmentation (group 1) and 54 patients who underwent conventional repair (group 2) for massive rotator cuff tears. Postoperative clinical outcomes were evaluated based on visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, simple shoulder test (SST), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Constant, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores at baseline, 1 year postoperatively, and final follow-up. Anatomic outcomes were evaluated by using postoperative magnetic resonance imaging at 1 year after surgery. RESULTS: No significant differences in demographic characteristics and baseline data were observed between groups 1 and 2. Clinical symptoms were significantly improved at the final follow-up in both groups (P < .001). At the final follow-up, no significant differences were found in VAS pain (P = .676), SST (P = .598), UCLA (P = .100), Constant (P = .469), or ASES (P = .880) scores. However, the retear rate was lower in group 1 (4/21, 19.0%) than in group 2 (25/54, 46.3%) (P = .036), and the medial-row failure rate (type 2 retears) was much lower in group 1 (0/4, 0%) than in group 2 (18/25, 72.0%) (P = .014). CONCLUSION: Concomitant bone marrow stimulation and patch augmentation significantly reduced retear and medial-row failure rates in the arthroscopic repair of massive rotator cuff tears.
BACKGROUND: The high failure rate after surgical repair of massive rotator cuff tears is a consistent problem. PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with bone marrow stimulation and patch augmentation in patients with massive rotator cuff tears. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: This study included 21 patients who underwent bone marrow stimulation and patch augmentation (group 1) and 54 patients who underwent conventional repair (group 2) for massive rotator cuff tears. Postoperative clinical outcomes were evaluated based on visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, simple shoulder test (SST), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Constant, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores at baseline, 1 year postoperatively, and final follow-up. Anatomic outcomes were evaluated by using postoperative magnetic resonance imaging at 1 year after surgery. RESULTS: No significant differences in demographic characteristics and baseline data were observed between groups 1 and 2. Clinical symptoms were significantly improved at the final follow-up in both groups (P < .001). At the final follow-up, no significant differences were found in VAS pain (P = .676), SST (P = .598), UCLA (P = .100), Constant (P = .469), or ASES (P = .880) scores. However, the retear rate was lower in group 1 (4/21, 19.0%) than in group 2 (25/54, 46.3%) (P = .036), and the medial-row failure rate (type 2 retears) was much lower in group 1 (0/4, 0%) than in group 2 (18/25, 72.0%) (P = .014). CONCLUSION: Concomitant bone marrow stimulation and patch augmentation significantly reduced retear and medial-row failure rates in the arthroscopic repair of massive rotator cuff tears.
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: Jonathan A Cook; Mathew Baldwin; Cushla Cooper; Navraj S Nagra; Joanna C Crocker; Molly Glaze; Gemma Greenall; Amar Rangan; Lucksy Kottam; Jonathan L Rees; Dair Farrar-Hockley; Naomi Merritt; Sally Hopewell; David Beard; Michael Thomas; Melina Dritsaki; Andrew J Carr Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: A Ali Narvani; Mohamed A Imam; Ioannis Polyzois; Tanaya Sarkhel; Rohit Gupta; Ofer Levy; Paolo Consigliere Journal: Arthrosc Tech Date: 2017-05-29