Jérôme Tirefort1,2, Adrien J Schwitzguebel2, Philippe Collin3, Alexandra Nowak2, Chantal Plomb-Holmes2, Alexandre Lädermann1,2,4. 1. Division of Orthopaedics and Trauma Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. 2. Division of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, La Tour Hospital, Meyrin, Switzerland. 3. Centre Hospitalier Prive[Combining Acute Accent] Saint-Gre[Combining Acute Accent]goire (Vivalto Sante[Combining Acute Accent]), Saint-Gre[Combining Acute Accent]goire, France. 4. Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients are commonly advised to wear a sling for 4 to 6 weeks after rotator cuff repair despite negative effects of early immobilization and benefits of motion rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes up to 6 months following rotator cuff repair with and without postoperative sling immobilization. METHODS: We randomized 80 patients scheduled forarthroscopic repair of a small or medium superior rotator cuff tear into sling and no-slinggroups (40 patients each). Passive mobilization was performed in both groups during the first 4 postoperative weeks, and this was followed by progressive active mobilization. Patients were evaluated clinically at 10 days and 1.5, 3, and 6 months and using ultrasound at 6 months. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to determine if postoperative scores were associated with sex, age at surgery, immobilization, arm dominance, a biceps procedure, resection of the distal part of the clavicle, or preoperative scores. RESULTS: The sling and no-sling groups had similar preoperative patient characteristics, function, and adjuvant procedures. At 10 days, there was no difference in pain between the 2 groups (mean pain score [and standard deviation], 5.2 ± 2.3 versus 5.2 ± 1.9, p = 0.996). In comparison with the sling group, the no-sling group showed greater mean external rotation (23.5° ± 15.6° versus 15.3° ± 14.6°, p = 0.017) and active elevation (110.9° ± 31.9° versus 97.0° ± 25.0°, p = 0.038) at 1.5 months as well as better mean active elevation (139.0° ± 24.7° versus 125.8° ± 24.4°, p = 0.015) and internal rotation (T12 or above in 50% versus 28%, p = 0.011) at 3 months. Ultrasound evaluation revealed no significant differences at 6 months in tendon thickness anteriorly (p = 0.472) or posteriorly (p = 0.639), bursitis (p = 1.000), echogenicity (p = 0.422), or repair integrity (p = 0.902). Multivariable analyses confirmed that the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score increased with patient age (beta, 0.60; p = 0.009), the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) decreased with sling immobilization (beta, -6.33; p = 0.014), and pain increased with sling immobilization (beta, 0.77; p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: No immobilization after rotator cuff repair is associated with better early mobility and functional scores in comparison with sling immobilization. Postoperative immobilization with a sling may therefore not be required for patients treated for a small or medium tendon tear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Patients are commonly advised to wear a sling for 4 to 6 weeks after rotator cuff repair despite negative effects of early immobilization and benefits of motion rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes up to 6 months following rotator cuff repair with and without postoperative sling immobilization. METHODS: We randomized 80 patients scheduled for arthroscopic repair of a small or medium superior rotator cuff tear into sling and no-sling groups (40 patients each). Passive mobilization was performed in both groups during the first 4 postoperative weeks, and this was followed by progressive active mobilization. Patients were evaluated clinically at 10 days and 1.5, 3, and 6 months and using ultrasound at 6 months. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to determine if postoperative scores were associated with sex, age at surgery, immobilization, arm dominance, a biceps procedure, resection of the distal part of the clavicle, or preoperative scores. RESULTS: The sling and no-sling groups had similar preoperative patient characteristics, function, and adjuvant procedures. At 10 days, there was no difference in pain between the 2 groups (mean pain score [and standard deviation], 5.2 ± 2.3 versus 5.2 ± 1.9, p = 0.996). In comparison with the sling group, the no-sling group showed greater mean external rotation (23.5° ± 15.6° versus 15.3° ± 14.6°, p = 0.017) and active elevation (110.9° ± 31.9° versus 97.0° ± 25.0°, p = 0.038) at 1.5 months as well as better mean active elevation (139.0° ± 24.7° versus 125.8° ± 24.4°, p = 0.015) and internal rotation (T12 or above in 50% versus 28%, p = 0.011) at 3 months. Ultrasound evaluation revealed no significant differences at 6 months in tendon thickness anteriorly (p = 0.472) or posteriorly (p = 0.639), bursitis (p = 1.000), echogenicity (p = 0.422), or repair integrity (p = 0.902). Multivariable analyses confirmed that the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score increased with patient age (beta, 0.60; p = 0.009), the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) decreased with sling immobilization (beta, -6.33; p = 0.014), and pain increased with sling immobilization (beta, 0.77; p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: No immobilization after rotator cuff repair is associated with better early mobility and functional scores in comparison with sling immobilization. Postoperative immobilization with a sling may therefore not be required for patients treated for a small or medium tendon tear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Authors: Thomas Stojanov; Linda Modler; Andreas M Müller; Soheila Aghlmandi; Christian Appenzeller-Herzog; Rafael Loucas; Marios Loucas; Laurent Audigé Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Cristina Roldán-Jiménez; Miguel Cuadros-Romero; Paul Bennett; Steven McPhail; Graham K Kerr; Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas; Jaime Martin-Martin Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2019-12-12 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Vincenzo Candela; Umile Giuseppe Longo; Calogero Di Naro; Gabriella Facchinetti; Anna Marchetti; Gaia Sciotti; Giulia Santamaria; Ilaria Piergentili; Maria Grazia De Marinis; Ara Nazarian; Vincenzo Denaro Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Patrick Goetti; Patrick J Denard; Philippe Collin; Mohamed Ibrahim; Pierre Hoffmeyer; Alexandre Lädermann Journal: EFORT Open Rev Date: 2020-09-10
Authors: Reed G Coda; Sana G Cheema; Christina A Hermanns; Armin Tarakemeh; Matthew L Vopat; Meghan Kramer; John Paul Schroeppel; Scott Mullen; Bryan G Vopat Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2020-05-29