Kathleen A Derwin1, Sambit Sahoo2, Alexander Zajichek3, Gregory Strnad4, Kurt P Spindler4, Joseph P Iannotti4, Eric T Ricchetti4. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: derwink@ccf.org. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 3. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopedic and Rheumatologic Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The factors that associate with surgical decisions about repair technique and the number of suture anchors used in rotator cuff repair have not been previously investigated. This study investigated the extent to which patient, surgeon, and surgical factors associate with performing single-row vs. double-row repair technique and ultimately with the number of suture anchors used. METHODS: Our institution's prospective surgical cohort was queried for patients undergoing suture anchor repair of superior-posterior rotator cuff tendon tears between February 2015 and August 2017. Exclusion criteria were patients with isolated subscapularis tears, tears that were not repaired, repairs without suture anchors, repairs involving graft augmentation, and repairs by surgeons with fewer than 10 cases. Multivariable statistical modeling was used to investigate associations between patient and surgical factors and the choice of repair technique and number of suture anchors used. RESULTS: A total of 925 cases performed by 13 surgeons met inclusion criteria. Tear type (full thickness), tear size (medium, large, and massive), a greater number of torn tendons, repair type (arthroscopic), and surgeon were significantly associated with performing a double-row over a single-row repair. Tear size, a greater number of torn tendons, double-row repair technique, and surgeon were significantly associated with a greater number of anchors used for repair. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that in the absence of data to conclusively support a clinical benefit of one repair technique over another, surgeons' training, experience, and inherent practice patterns become the primary factors that define their surgical methods.
BACKGROUND: The factors that associate with surgical decisions about repair technique and the number of suture anchors used in rotator cuff repair have not been previously investigated. This study investigated the extent to which patient, surgeon, and surgical factors associate with performing single-row vs. double-row repair technique and ultimately with the number of suture anchors used. METHODS: Our institution's prospective surgical cohort was queried for patients undergoing suture anchor repair of superior-posterior rotator cuff tendon tears between February 2015 and August 2017. Exclusion criteria were patients with isolated subscapularis tears, tears that were not repaired, repairs without suture anchors, repairs involving graft augmentation, and repairs by surgeons with fewer than 10 cases. Multivariable statistical modeling was used to investigate associations between patient and surgical factors and the choice of repair technique and number of suture anchors used. RESULTS: A total of 925 cases performed by 13 surgeons met inclusion criteria. Tear type (full thickness), tear size (medium, large, and massive), a greater number of torn tendons, repair type (arthroscopic), and surgeon were significantly associated with performing a double-row over a single-row repair. Tear size, a greater number of torn tendons, double-row repair technique, and surgeon were significantly associated with a greater number of anchors used for repair. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that in the absence of data to conclusively support a clinical benefit of one repair technique over another, surgeons' training, experience, and inherent practice patterns become the primary factors that define their surgical methods.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: James W Genuario; Ryan P Donegan; Daniel Hamman; John-Erik Bell; Martin Boublik; Theodore Schlegel; Anna N A Tosteson Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2012-08-01 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Alexis Chiang Colvin; Natalia Egorova; Alicia K Harrison; Alan Moskowitz; Evan L Flatow Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Alexander M DeHaan; Thomas W Axelrad; Elizabeth Kaye; Lorenzo Silvestri; Brian Puskas; Timothy E Foster Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2011-12-08 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Mark A Vitale; Michael G Vitale; Joshua G Zivin; Jonathan P Braman; Louis U Bigliani; Evan L Flatow Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2007 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Francesco Franceschi; Laura Ruzzini; Umile Giuseppe Longo; Francesca Maria Martina; Bruno Beomonte Zobel; Nicola Maffulli; Vincenzo Denaro Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2007-06-06 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Sambit Sahoo; Eric T Ricchetti; Alexander Zajichek; Peter J Evans; Lutul D Farrow; Brett W McCoy; Morgan H Jones; Anthony A Miniaci; Vani J Sabesan; Mark S Schickendantz; William H Seitz; Kurt P Spindler; Kim L Stearns; Greg Strnad; Alparslan Turan; Vahid Entezari; Peter B Imrey; Joseph P Iannotti; Kathleen A Derwin Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2019-12-18 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Sambit Sahoo; José A Rodríguez; Matthew Serna; Kurt P Spindler; Kathleen A Derwin; Joseph P Iannotti; Eric T Ricchetti Journal: Semin Arthroplasty Date: 2021-02-13
Authors: Sambit Sahoo; Jill Mohr; Gregory J Strnad; Jose Vega; Morgan Jones; Mark S Schickendantz; Lutul Farrow; Kurt P Spindler; Joseph P Iannotti; Eric T Ricchetti; Kathleen A Derwin Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Sambit Sahoo; Kathleen A Derwin; Alexander Zajichek; Vahid Entezari; Peter B Imrey; Joseph P Iannotti; Eric T Ricchetti Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2020-08-26 Impact factor: 3.019