Seaher Sakha1, Safiya Erdogan1, Ajaykumar Shanmugaraj1, Marcel Betsch2,3, Timothy Leroux2, Moin Khan1. 1. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. 2. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Center of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty University Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To provide an updated comparison between modern arthroscopic and mini-open repairs for treating rotator cuff tears. METHODS: Multiple online databases were searched from 2010 to October 1st, 2020. A meta-analysis was conducted for patient-reported outcomes and complications. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included. Majority of patients underwent mini-open repair (MOR) compared to arthroscopic repair (AR) (57.4% vs 42.6%). A meta-analysis found statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in patient-reported outcomes favouring AR. While retear rates were higher in AR (p = 0.03) analysis of retear rates for arthroscopic double row and mini-open repairs, yielded no differences between groups (p = 0.48). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing AR for rotator cuff tears had improved post-operative clinical outcomes in some functional outcomes compared to MOR. Modern arthroscopic double row repair result in similar failure rates to open repair techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Systematic Review of Level I-III studies.
PURPOSE: To provide an updated comparison between modern arthroscopic and mini-open repairs for treating rotator cuff tears. METHODS: Multiple online databases were searched from 2010 to October 1st, 2020. A meta-analysis was conducted for patient-reported outcomes and complications. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included. Majority of patients underwent mini-open repair (MOR) compared to arthroscopic repair (AR) (57.4% vs 42.6%). A meta-analysis found statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in patient-reported outcomes favouring AR. While retear rates were higher in AR (p = 0.03) analysis of retear rates for arthroscopic double row and mini-open repairs, yielded no differences between groups (p = 0.48). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing AR for rotator cuff tears had improved post-operative clinical outcomes in some functional outcomes compared to MOR. Modern arthroscopic double row repair result in similar failure rates to open repair techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Systematic Review of Level I-III studies.
Authors: Pietro Randelli; Davide Cucchi; Vincenza Ragone; Laura de Girolamo; Paolo Cabitza; Mario Randelli Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: David Moher; Larissa Shamseer; Mike Clarke; Davina Ghersi; Alessandro Liberati; Mark Petticrew; Paul Shekelle; Lesley A Stewart Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2015-01-01