| Literature DB >> 30655093 |
Seok Won Chung1, Kyung-Soo Oh1, Se-Young Ki1, Jayoun Kim2, Jong Pil Yoon3, Joon Yub Kim4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate factors associated with the needle breakage of antegrade suture passer and the effect of intratendinous remnant needle tip on clinical outcomes after rotator cuff repair.Entities:
Keywords: Antegrade suture passer; Clinical outcome Level of Evidence: Level III, Therapeutic Study; Needle breakage; Rotator cuff repair
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30655093 PMCID: PMC6510669 DOI: 10.1016/j.aott.2018.12.006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc ISSN: 1017-995X Impact factor: 1.511
Fig. 1The plain anteroposterior (A) and axial (B) radiograph of the shoulder show the remnant needle tip around the medial side of the footprint (arrows).
Fig. 2Shows measurement of the cuff tendon thickness. Tendon thickness was defined as the vertical width of the thickest tendon portion in the MR T1-weighted fat-suppression oblique coronal image where the retraction of the torn cuff tendon is the most prominent (red line).
Fig. 3The flowchart is shown.
Fig. 4Shows boxplots before and after propensity score matching.
Comparison between matched remnant needle tip (+) group and matched remnant needle tip (−) group.
| Matched remnant needle (+) group (n = 16) | Matched remnant needle (−) group (n = 64) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 60.4 ± 7.4 | 60.9 ± 8.4 | 0.814 |
| Gender (M:F, n) | 8:8 | 35:29 | 0.785 |
| Duration of symptoms (months) | 16.8 ± 21.7 | 16.6 ± 19.8 | 0.990 |
| Side of involvement (D:ND, n) | 13:3 | 44:20 | 0.520 |
| Steroid injection history (n) | 8 (50.0%) | 23 (36.5%) | 0.394 |
| Traumatic onset (n) | 5 (31.3%) | 15 (23.4%) | 0.530 |
| Preoperative stiffness (n) | 3 (18.8%) | 11 (17.2%) | >0.999 |
| Smoking (n) | 3 (18.8%) | 11 (17.2%) | >0.999 |
| Diabetes mellitus (n) | 5 (31.3%) | 20 (31.3%) | >0.999 |
| Hypercholesterolemia (n) | 6 (37.5%) | 12 (18.7%) | 0.360 |
| Sports level (Low:Middle:High) | 9: 5: 2 | 30: 19: 15 | 0.892 |
| Work level (Low:Middle:High) | 5: 3: 8 | 22: 28: 14 | 0.162 |
| 3:6:5:2 | 7:30:16:11 | 0.744 | |
| 21.92 ± 9.94 | 25.08 ± 12.44 | 0.254 | |
| 18.66 ± 9.93 | 18.76 ± 13.69 | 0.979 | |
| Number of medial anchors | 2.31 ± 0.70 (1–3) | 2.08 ± 0.72 (1–3) | 0.252 |
| Times of suture passing from medial anchors | 8.31 ± 2.25 (4–16) | 8.11 ± 2.48 (4–16) | 0.719 |
| 1.31 ± 0.94 | 1.60 ± 0.86 | 0.217 | |
| 1.31 ± 1.01 | 1.39 ± 1.12 | 0.800 | |
| 1.06 ± 1.06 | 0.87 ± 1.03 | 0.520 | |
| Delamination tear (n) | 7 (43.7%) | 18 (28.1%) | 0.261 |
| Biceps procedure (To:Td:no, n) | 6:3:7 | 20:27:17 | 0.460 |
| 6.72 ± 1.05 | 6.28 ± 1.27 | 0.307 | |
| 1.88 ± 0.84 | 1.82 ± 0.80 | 0.850 | |
| (G0:G1:G2:G3) | 0:5:6:5 | 2:17:29:16 | (G0:G1:G2:G3) |
M, male; F, female; D, dominant; ND, nondominant; AP, anteroposterior; FI, fatty infiltration; To, tenotomy; Td, tenodesis.
The tear size was measured arthroscopically using a calibrated probe at the time of surgery, and classified according to the rating system of DeOrio and Cofield.
Fatty infiltration was graded according to the criteria established by Goutallier et al.
Tendon thickness was defined as the width of the thickest tendon portion in the MR T2-weighted oblique coronal image where the retraction of the torn cuff tendon is the most prominent.
Tendinosis was graded according to the criteria established by Sein et al.
Characteristics of the patients with remnant needle tip compared with those without remnant needle tip.
| Remnant needle (+) group (n = 16) | Remnant needle (−) group (n = 267) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 60.4 ± 7.4 | 59.4 ± 9.2 | 0.686 |
| Gender (M:F, n) | 8:8 | 130:137 | 0.975 |
| Duration of symptoms (months) | 16.8 ± 21.7 | 18.9 ± 23.1 | 0.778 |
| Side of involvement (D:ND, n) | 13:3 | 184:83 | 0.793 |
| Steroid injection history (n) | 8 (50.0%) | 89 (33.3%) | 0.211 |
| Traumatic onset (n) | 5 (31.3%) | 87 (32.6%) | 0.895 |
| Preoperative stiffness (n) | 3 (18.8%) | 48 (18.0%) | 0.823 |
| Smoking (n) | 3 (18.8%) | 38 (14.2%) | 0.472 |
| Diabetes mellitus (n) | 5 (31.3%) | 47 (17.6%) | 0.125 |
| Hypercholesterolemia (n) | 6 (37.5%) | 57 (21.3%) | 0.124 |
| Sports level (Low:Middle:High) | 9: 5: 2 | 134: 81: 52 | 0.173 |
| Work level (Low:Middle:High) | 5: 3: 8 | 106: 97: 64 | 0.465 |
| 3:6:5:2 | 49:115:54:49 | 0.360 | |
| 21.92 ± 9.94 | 26.05 ± 14.58 | 0.315 | |
| 18.66 ± 9.93 | 20.89 ± 13.12 | 0.542 | |
| Number of medial anchors | 2.31 ± 0.70 (1–3) | 2.07 ± 0.71 (1–3) | 0.184 |
| Times of suture passing from medial anchors | 8.31 ± 2.25 (4–16) | 8.09 ± 2.34 (4–16) | 0.631 |
| 1.31 ± 0.94 | 1.74 ± 0.94 | 0.109 | |
| 1.31 ± 1.01 | 1.51 ± 1.11 | 0.423 | |
| 1.06 ± 1.06 | 1.02 ± 1.15 | 0.905 | |
| Delamination tear (n) | 9 (56.3%) | 86 (32.2%) | |
| Biceps procedure (To:Td:no, n) | 6:3:7 | 96:59:112 | 0.785 |
| 6.72 ± 1.05 | 5.33 ± 1.34 | ||
| 1.88 ± 0.84 | 1.43 ± 0.82 | ||
| (G0:G1:G2:G3) | 0:5:6:5 | 34:116:88:29 | (G0:G1:G2:G3) |
M, male; F, female; D, dominant; ND, nondominant; AP, anteroposterior; FI, fatty infiltration; To, tenotomy; Td, tenodesis.
The tear size was measured arthroscopically using a calibrated probe at the time of surgery, and classified according to the rating system of DeOrio and Cofield.
Fatty infiltration was graded according to the criteria established by Goutallier et al.
Tendon thickness was defined as the width of the thickest tendon portion in the MR T2-weighted oblique coronal image where the retraction of the torn cuff tendon is the most prominent.
Tendinosis was graded according to the criteria established by Sein et al.
Functional outcomes after surgery: comparison between those with and without remnant needle tip after propensity score matching.
| Evaluation tool | Preoperative | Postoperative (>1yr) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matched remnant needle (+) group | Matched remnant needle (−) group | p value | Matched remnant needle (+) group | Matched remnant needle (−) group | p value | ||
| ROM | FF | 157.81 ± 19.05 | 157.81 ± 22.58 | >0.999 | 163.33 ± 37.85 | 172.50 ± 10.83 | 0.578 |
| ER | 50.01 ± 19.27 | 50.31 ± 16.27 | 0.961 | 55.10 ± 18.02 | 60.33 ± 7.52 | 0.496 | |
| IR | 11.56 ± 3.70 | 10.12 ± 2.91 | 0.532 | 10.33 ± 4.16 | 9.40 ± 3.13 | 0.451 | |
| Pain VAS | 6.50 ± 2.16 | 6.74 ± 2.02 | 0.780 | 1.21 ± 3.16 | 0.82 ± 3.06 | 0.639 | |
| ASES | 50.62 ± 17.56 | 48.58 ± 16.54 | 0.754 | 86.66 ± 32.99 | 93.12 ± 11.57 | 0.741 | |
| Constant | 52.11 ± 15.39 | 54.11 ± 10.56 | 0.400 | 87.04 ± 2.82 | 89.85 ± 17.12 | 0.892 | |
| SST | 4.05 ± 2.73 | 4.74 ± 3.04 | 0.760 | 9.66 ± 2.51 | 10.60 ± 2.30 | 0.610 | |
| UCLA | 19.33 ± 3.50 | 18.45 ± 5.35 | 0.668 | 30.10 ± 6.51 | 29.83 ± 6.49 | 0.982 | |
ROM, range of motion; FF, forward flexion; ER, external rotation at the side; IR, internal rotation at the back; VAS, visual analogue scale; ASES, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon's score; SST, Simple Shoulder Test score; UCLA, University of California–Los Angeles score.
Fig. 5Shows the functional outcomes evaluated at final follow-up (>1yr) between matched groups.
Fig. 6Shows the comparison of the pain VAS between matched groups, *statistically significant.
Fig. 7Shows forward flexion, external rotation at the side, internal rotation at the back. The range of motion of shoulder did not show any differences in all postoperative periods.