Literature DB >> 30683950

Double-row rotator cuff repairs lead to more intensive pain during the early postoperative period but have a lower risk of residual pain than single-row repairs.

Yuzhou Chen1, Hong Li1, Yang Qiao2, Yunshen Ge1, Yunxia Li1, Yinghui Hua1, Jiwu Chen1, Shiyi Chen3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare pain patterns and identify factors associated with residual shoulder pain after rotator cuff repairs using double-row and single-row techniques.
METHODS: A cohort study was performed using patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs at our center in 2015. Patients were allocated according to the repair technique into an single-row (SR) group or a double-row (DR) group. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for pain were assessed at 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after surgery. Functional and radiographic assessments were performed at least 24 months postoperatively. The proportion of patients with residual pain and factors associated with residual shoulder pain (VAS > 0 at the final follow-up) were analyzed in both groups.
RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were enrolled in the SR group, and 53 were enrolled in the DR group. The DR group appeared to have higher levels of pain 1 week (P < 0.001) and 3 months (P = 0.041) postoperatively, while at other time points, the pain intensity of the two groups was comparable. Fourteen (26.4%) and 25 (48.1%) patients in the DR and the SR groups, respectively, developed residual shoulder pain, (P = 0.022; RR 1.82). The univariate analysis and multiple regression revealed that a poorer quality of tendon tissue is related to residual pain in the SR group, whereas tendon retraction is associated with residual pain in the DR group. The rate of re-tear was similar between the two groups and between patients with and without residual pain.
CONCLUSIONS: The DR repair technique results in a greater intensity of pain than that of SR repair during the first 3 months after surgery; however, patients who underwent DR repair presented a significantly lower proportion of residual shoulder pain and better tendon quality after 2 years. Poorer tendon quality and larger tendon retraction as determined intraoperatively were risk factors for residual pain. These results highlight the necessity of promoting healing on the grounds of residual pain prevention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Double row repair; Inflammation; Residual pain; Rotator cuff

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30683950     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-019-05346-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  37 in total

1.  Rotator cuff repair tension as a determinant of functional outcome.

Authors:  P A Davidson; D W Rivenburgh
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2000 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.019

2.  American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

Authors:  Lori A Michener; Philip W McClure; Brian J Sennett
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.019

3.  The tension required at repair to reappose the supraspinatus tendon to bone rapidly increases after injury.

Authors:  Jonathan A Gimbel; Samir Mehta; Jonathan P Van Kleunen; Gerald R Williams; Louis J Soslowsky
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Fatty degeneration of the muscles of the rotator cuff: assessment by computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  B Fuchs; D Weishaupt; M Zanetti; J Hodler; C Gerber
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.019

5.  Functional and structural outcome after arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair: single-row versus dual-row fixation.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Sugaya; Kazuhiko Maeda; Keisuke Matsuki; Joji Moriishi
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 4.772

6.  A review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use.

Authors:  Christopher R Constant; Christian Gerber; Roger J H Emery; Jens Ole Søjbjerg; Frank Gohlke; Pascal Boileau
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 3.019

7.  Single-row modified mason-allen versus double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a biomechanical and surface area comparison.

Authors:  Cory O Nelson; Michael J Sileo; Mark G Grossman; Frederick Serra-Hsu
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2008-05-19       Impact factor: 4.772

8.  Comparison of the clinical outcomes of single- and double-row repairs in rotator cuff tears.

Authors:  Jin-Young Park; Sang-Hoon Lhee; Jin-Hyung Choi; Hong-Keun Park; Je-Wook Yu; Joong-Bae Seo
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  Effect of tendon release and delayed repair on the structure of the muscles of the rotator cuff: an experimental study in sheep.

Authors:  C Gerber; D C Meyer; A G Schneeberger; H Hoppeler; B von Rechenberg
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Biomechanical characteristics of single-row repair in comparison to double-row repair with consideration of the suture configuration and suture material.

Authors:  M H Baums; G H Buchhorn; G Spahn; B Poppendieck; W Schultz; H-M Klinger
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2008-08-29       Impact factor: 4.342

View more
  2 in total

1.  Postoperative residual pain is associated with a high magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based signal intensity of the repaired supraspinatus tendon.

Authors:  Hong Li; Yuzhou Chen; Shiyi Chen
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Mobility Assessment of the Supraspinatus in a Porcine Cadaver Model Using a Sensor-Enhanced, Arthroscopic Grasper.

Authors:  Felix Porschke; Christoph Luecke; Thorsten Guehring; Christel Weiss; Stefan Studier-Fischer; Paul Alfred Gruetzner; Marc Schnetzke
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 3.934

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.