2003Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgeryRequires access

Arthroscopic versus mini‐open salvage repair of the rotator cuff tear: outcome analysis at 2 to 6 years’ follow‐up

Seung‐Ho Kim, Kwon-Ick Ha, Jong-Hyuk Park, Jin-Seok Kang, Sung-Kyun Oh, Irvin Oh

Open publisher page 125 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of arthroscopic repair of medium and large rotator cuff tears with the outcomes for mini-open repair of similar tears in which arthroscopic repair was technically unsuccessful. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective case series. METHODS: We evaluated 76 patients who were treated for full-thickness rotator cuff tears either by all-arthroscopic (42 patients) or mini-open salvage of technically unsuccessful arthroscopic repair (34 patients). Patients who had acromioclavicular arthritis, subscapularis tear, or instability were excluded. There were 39 men and 37 women, with a mean age of 56 years (range, 42 to 75 years). At a mean follow-up of 39 months (range, 24 to 64 months), the results of both groups were compared using the University of California Los Angeles and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder rating scales. RESULTS: Shoulder scores improved in all ratings in both groups (P <.05). Overall, 66 patients showed excellent or good and 10 patients showed fair or poor scores by the University of California Los Angeles scale. Seventy-two patients satisfactorily returned to previous activity, and 4 showed unsatisfactory returns. The range of motion, strength, and patient satisfaction were improved postoperatively. No differences were seen in shoulder scores, pain, and activity return between the arthroscopic and mini-open salvage groups (P >.05). However, patients with larger tears showed lower shoulder scores and less predictable recovery of strength and function (P <.05). Postoperative pain was not different with respect to the size of the tear (P =.251). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic repair of medium and large full-thickness rotator cuff tears had an equal outcome to technically unsuccessful arthroscopic repairs, which were salvaged by conversion to a mini-open repair technique. Surgical outcome depended on the size of the tear, rather than the method of repair.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of arthroscopic repair of medium and large rotator cuff tears with the outcomes for mini-open repair of similar tears in which arthroscopic repair was technically unsuccessful. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective case series. METHODS: We evaluated 76 patients who were treated for full-thickness rotator cuff tears either by all-arthroscopic (42 patients) or mini-open salvage of technically unsuccessful arthroscopic repair (34 patients). Patients who had acromioclavicular arthritis, subscapularis tear, or instability were excluded. There were 39 men and 37 women, with a mean age of 56 years (range, 42 to 75 years). At a mean follow-up of 39 months (range, 24 to 64 months), the results of both groups were compared using the University of California Los Angeles and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder rating scales. RESULTS: Shoulder scores improved in all ratings in both groups (P <.05). Overall, 66 patients showed excellent or good and 10 patients showed fair or poor scores by the University of California Los Angeles scale. Seventy-two patients satisfactorily returned to previous activity, and 4 showed unsatisfactory returns. The range of motion, strength, and patient satisfaction were improved postoperatively. No differences were seen in shoulder scores, pain, and activity return between the arthroscopic and mini-open salvage groups (P >.05). However, patients with larger tears showed lower shoulder scores and less predictable recovery of strength and function (P <.05). Postoperative pain was not different with respect to the size of the tear (P =.251). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic repair of medium and large full-thickness rotator cuff tears had an equal outcome to technically unsuccessful arthroscopic repairs, which were salvaged by conversion to a mini-open repair technique. Surgical outcome depended on the size of the tear, rather than the method of repair.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 125 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of arthroscopic repair of medium and large rotator cuff tears with the outcomes for mini-open repair of similar tears in which arthroscopic repair was technically unsuccessful. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective case series. METHODS: We evaluated 76 patients who were treated for full-thickness rotator cuff tears either by all-arthroscopic (42 patients) or mini-open salvage of technically unsuccessful arthroscopic repair (34 patients). Patients who had acromioclavicular arthritis, subscapularis tear, or instability were excluded. There were 39 men and 37 women, with a mean age of 56 years (range, 42 to 75 years). At a mean follow-up of 39 months (range, 24 to 64 months), the results of both groups were compared using the University of California Los Angeles and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder rating scales. RESULTS: Shoulder scores improved in all ratings in both groups (P <.05). Overall, 66 patients showed excellent or good and 10 patients showed fair or poor scores by the University of California Los Angeles scale. Seventy-two patients satisfactorily returned to previous activity, and 4 showed unsatisfactory returns. The range of motion, strength, and patient satisfaction were improved postoperatively. No differences were seen in shoulder scores, pain, and activity return between the arthroscopic and mini-open salvage groups (P >.05). However, patients with larger tears showed lower shoulder scores and less predictable recovery of strength and function (P <.05). Postoperative pain was not different with respect to the size of the tear (P =.251). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic repair of medium and large full-thickness rotator cuff tears had an equal outcome to technically unsuccessful arthroscopic repairs, which were salvaged by conversion to a mini-open repair technique. Surgical outcome depended on the size of the tear, rather than the method of repair.

Key concepts: Medicine, Rotator cuff, Tears, Surgery, Range of motion, Elbow, Arthroscopy, Patient satisfaction

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Arthroscopic versus mini‐open salvage repair of the rotator cuff tear: outcome analysis at 2 to 6 years’ follow‐up — Research Paper | ScholarLens