Does arthroscopic preemptive extensive rotator interval release reduce postoperative stiffness after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair?: a prospective randomized clinical trial

One-stage rotator cuff repair in stiff shoulders shows comparable range of motion, clinical outcome and retear rates to non-stiff shoulders: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

One-stage treatment involving rotator cuff repair and shoulder capsule release is mainly used to treat patients with rotator cuff tears (RCTs) and concomitant shoulder stiffness. Despite the increasing attention to the efficacy and safety of one-stage treatment, controversy still remains. Therefore, this systematic review aims to summarize the indications, operation procedure and rehabilitation protocol, and compare the range of motions (ROMs), functional outcomes and retear rates of one-stage treatment for RCTs in stiff shoulders and non-stiff shoulders.

METHODS

Multiple databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase and MEDLINE) were searched for studies that investigated outcomes after one-stage treatment for RCTs concomitant with shoulder stiffness compared with rotator cuff repair for RCTs alone, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. Descriptive statistics, including range of motion, patient-reported outcome and retear rate, are presented without meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity and low levels of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 9 cohort studies were included, with 305 patients treated with one-stage treatment involving rotator cuff repair and simultaneous shoulder capsular release and 1059 patients treated with rotator cuff repair alone. Patients in both groups had significant symptom improvement and functional recovery after the one-stage treatment for the stiffness group and standard repair for the non-stiffness group, and most patients could return to normal life and work within 6 months after the operation. The retear rate in the one-stage treatment group was not higher than that in the rotator cuff repair group. No statistically significant differences between the two groups were observed in terms of range of motion and patient-reported outcomes in the vast majority of studies at the final follow-up, including the visual analog scale for pain, the Constant score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, the University of California Los Angeles Shoulder Score, the Oxford shoulder score and the Simple Shoulder Test.

CONCLUSION

One-stage treatment for RCTs in stiff shoulders provides comparable ROM and patient-reported clinical outcomes as rotator cuff repair for non-stiff RCTs. In addition, the rate of postoperative retear in stiff shoulder treated with one-stage treatment was not higher than in non-stiff shoulders.

Preemptive middle glenohumeral ligament release in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair does not reduce the postoperative stiffness: a retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of preemptive middle glenohumeral ligament (MGHL) release in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) to reduce postoperative stiffness.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ARCR were enrolled and allocated into two groups retrospectively: the preemptive MGHL release group (n = 44) and the preemptive MGHL non-release group (n = 42). Clinical outcomes were assessed and compared between the two groups, including the range of motion, Japanese Orthopedic Association Shoulder Score, Constant Shoulder Score, and the University of California, Los Angeles Score preoperatively and 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively and complications. The integrity of the repaired tendon was assessed at the 12-month follow-up using magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the groups in all range of motion and all functional scores at any of the assessed time points. There was also no significant difference in the healing failure rate 2.3% in the preemptive MGHL group and 2.4% in the preemptive MGHL non-release group (p = .97), and postoperative stiffness was 2.3% in the preemptive MGHL group and 7.1% in the preemptive MGHL non-release group (p = .28). There was no postoperative instability in both group.

CONCLUSION

ARCR effectively facilitates the recovery of range of motion and function in patients with a rotator cuff tear. However, preemptive MGHL release could not be an effective method to reduce postoperative stiffness.

Influence of joint volume on range of motion after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

BACKGROUND

Capsular contracture is a well-known etiology in the primary stiff shoulder; thus capsular contracture and resultant decreased joint volume could lead to postoperative stiffness, which is a commonly reported morbidity after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). The purpose of this study was (1) to quantify the joint volume (total joint volume and each quadrant compartmental volume) using computed tomography arthrography (CTA) and (2) to demonstrate the relationship between joint volume and postoperative range of motion (ROM) after ARCR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-three patients (60 ± 5.11 years, men = 26, women = 57) who had undergone ARCR between January 2015 to December 2020 due to small to medium full-thickness tear and followed by CTA 6 months postoperatively were retrospectively reviewed. An image reconstruction program (3D Slicer, version 4.11.2 software) was used to calculate the joint volume (total joint volume and quadrant compartment joint volumes; anteroinferior, anterosuperior, posterosuperior and posteroinferior). For shoulder ROM, data including scaption (Sc), external rotation on side (ERs), external rotation at 90° (ER90), and internal rotation on back (IRb) were collected 6 months postoperatively. An evaluation of the correlation between joint volume and each shoulder motion was performed.

RESULTS

There were moderate correlations between the total joint volume and each motion (Sc: Pearson coefficient, 0.32, p = 0.0047; ERs: Pearson coefficient, 0.24, p = 0.0296; ER90: Pearson coefficient, 0.33, p = 0.0023; IRb: Pearson coefficient, 0.23, p = 0.0336). Among the quadrant compartments, the anteroinferior (Sc: Pearson coefficient, 0.26, p = 0.0199; ERs: Pearson coefficient, 0.23, p = 0.0336; ER90: Pearson coefficient, 0.25, p = 0.0246; IRb: Pearson coefficient, 0.26, p = 0.0168) and posterosuperior (Sc: Pearson coefficient, 0.24, p = 0.029; ER90: Pearson coefficient, 0.29, p = 0.008; IRb: Pearson coefficient, 0.22, p = 0.0491) and posteroinferior (Sc: Pearson coefficient, 0.30, p = 0.0064; ER90: Pearson coefficient, 0.29, p = 0.0072) showed moderate correlations with each shoulder motion.

CONCLUSION

Total joint volume, anteroinferior compartment joint volume, posterosuperior compartment joint volume and posteroinferior compartment joint volume were related to postoperative ROM after ARCR. Perioperative methods to increase the joint volume, especially the anteroinferior, posterosuperior and posteroinferior parts of the capsule may prevent postoperative stiffness after ARCR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III; Retrospective Case-Control Study.

Incidence and risk factors for early postoperative stiffness after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients without preoperative stiffness

The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors of early postoperative stiffness in patients without preoperative stiffness undergoing isolated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). Two hundred seventy-four patients who underwent primary ARCR were included. At 3 months after surgery, criteria for shoulder stiffness was set as follows: (1) passive forward flexion < 120˚, or (2) external rotation at side < 30˚. Patients with preoperative stiffness or who underwent additional procedures were excluded. Patients-related, radiological (muscle atrophy and fatty infiltration), and intraoperative (tear size, repair techniques, number of anchors used, and synovitis scores) risk factors were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify risk factors for postoperative stiffness. Thirty-nine of 274 patients (14.2%) who underwent ARCR developed postoperative stiffness. Univariate analyses revealed that early postoperative stiffness was significantly associated with diabetes mellitus (p = 0.030). However, radiological and intraoperative factors did not affect postoperative shoulder stiffness (all p > 0.05). Multivariate analyses revealed early postoperative stiffness was significantly associated with diabetes mellitus and timing of rehabilitation (p = 0.024, p = 0.033, respectively). The overall incidence of early postoperative stiffness following isolated ARCR in patients without preoperative stiffness was 14.2%. Diabetes mellitus and timing of rehabilitation were independent risk factors for early postoperative stiffness following ARCR.

Treatment of partial rotator cuff lesions is associated with a higher frequency of post-operative shoulder stiffness. A prospective investigation on the role of surgery-related risk factors for this complication

PURPOSE

Post-operative shoulder stiffness (SS) is a common complication after arthroscopic rotator cuff (RC) repair. The aim of this prospective study is to evaluate the role of surgical risk factors in the development of this complication, with special focus on the characteristics of the RC tears.

METHODS

Two-hundred and twenty patients who underwent arthroscopic RC repair for degenerative posterosuperior RC tears were included. Surgery-related risk factors for development of post-operative SS belonging to the following five categories were documented and analyzed: previous surgery, RC tear characteristics, hardware and repair type, concomitant procedures, time and duration of surgery. The incidence of post-operative SS was evaluated according to the criteria described by Brislin and colleagues.

RESULTS

The incidence of post-operative SS was 8.64%. The treatment of partial lesions by tear completion and repair technique was significantly associated with development of post-operative SS (p = 0.0083, pc = 0.04). A multivariate analysis revealed that treatment of partial lesions in patients younger than 60 years was associated to a higher risk of developing post-operative SS (p = 0.007). Previously known pre-operative risk factors such as female sex and younger age were confirmed. No other significant associations were documented.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of partial lesions of the RC may lead to a higher risk of post-operative SS than the treatment of complete lesions, in particular in patients younger than 60 years. Possible explanations of this finding are the increased release of pro-inflammatory cytokines caused by the additional surgical trauma needed to complete the lesion and the different pain perception of the subgroup of patients who require surgical treatment already for partial tears.

EVIDENCE

A higher risk of post-operative SS should be expected after tear completion and repair of partial lesions, especially in young patients. Appropriate pre-operative counseling and post-operative rehabilitation should be considered when approaching this subgroup of RC tears.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level II.

[Posttraumatic shoulder stiffness]

Posttraumatic stiffness of the shoulder joint is a frequent and socioeconomically relevant result of injury; however, prior to making the diagnosis as the only cause of a persisting impairment of motion, it is necessary to rule out other sequelae of trauma. Even intensive conservative treatment is mostly accompanied by the stagnation of the impairments of movement. In many cases the treatment of choice is early arthroscopic arthrolysis with a standardized approach and intensive follow-up treatment. In the surgical treatment of proximal humeral fractures with humeral head preservation, arthroscopic arthrolysis with simultaneous implant removal is a form of planned second intervention for improvement of shoulder function in cases of persisting motion deficits after bony consolidation. Despite sometimes substantial limitations of movement, a clinically relevant and lasting improvement of shoulder function can be achieved with arthroscopic arthrolysis in posttraumatic shoulder stiffness.

A Historical Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials in Rotator Cuff Tears

Background and objectives: Our research aimed to evaluate the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) linked to rotator cuff (RC) tears. The present study analyzed factors connected to the quality of the RCTs and trends in the quality of reporting through time. Materials and Methods: The online databases used to search all RCTs on the topic of RC surgery completed until March 2020 were PubMed and Ovid (MEDLINE). The quality of reporting was evaluated using the modified Coleman methodology score (MCMS) and the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT). Results: The online search found 957 articles. Finally, 183 studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. A total of 97 (53%) of 183 studies had a level of evidence I and 86 (47%) of 183 studies had a level of evidence II, according to the Oxford Center of Evidence Based Medicine (EBM). A statistically significant difference in MCMS between articles written before 2010 and articles written after 2010 was found. Articles written after 2010 had, on average, the highest Coleman score. The average number of CONSORT checklist items for each article across all analyzed RCTs was 21.67. The 37 studies completed up to 2010 averaged a number of checklist items of 19.97 and the studies completed between 2011 and 2019 averaged a number of checklist items of 22.10. A statistically significant difference in the number of checklist items between articles written before 2010 and articles written after 2010 was found. Articles written after 2010 had on average more checklist items. However, low correlation (0.26) between the number of checklist items for each article and the respective Coleman score was found. On the other hand, articles with the CONSORT diagram had a significantly high Coleman score. Conclusions: An improvement in the quantity and quality of RCTs relating to RC surgery over the analyzed period was found.

Arthroscopic Outside-In Shoulder Release for Patients With an Inaccessible Glenohumeral Joint

Rotator interval release is an important procedure used in many shoulder operations. It is currently performed through an intra-articular approach, which may result in incomplete release or tissue removal. Here, we introduce an outside-in rotator interval release technique for complete rotator interval tissue removal, which is performed mainly through the lateral portal and a distal anterior portal under the coracoacromial arch. This technique can be used for many shoulder conditions, such as severe joint contracture or fibrosis, fixed shoulder dislocation, or disorders of the long head of the biceps. Our experience indicates that this technique is easy, effective, and capable of addressing even the most difficult shoulder conditions. We believe that adoption of this technique by surgeons can facilitate the success of many shoulder operations.

Fibrosis in the rotator interval associated with articular vs. bursal side partial-thickness rotator cuff tears

Background

The pathogenesis of articular- and bursal-sided partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PTRCTs) is considered to be different, and associated lesions with PTRCTs need to be examined.

Methods

The current study consisted of 76 shoulders of 73 patients (27 men, 46 women, 64.0 ± 8.3 years old) who underwent mini-open repair after conversion to full-thickness tears for either articular side (group A; n = 56) or bursal side (group B; n = 20) PTRCT with at least a 2-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes and their images were compared between the groups. Plain radiographs were used with the arm passively elevated in maximum elevation to assess restriction of glenohumeral motion.

Results

The retear rate was not significantly different between the groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in functional scores at the final follow-up. Patients in group A showed a higher incidence of preoperative fibrosis in the rotator interval (69.6% vs. 35.0%, respectively; P = .006) and a lower incidence of an acromial spur (7.1% vs. 35.0%, respectively; P = .008) compared with group B. Plain radiographs with arm elevation showed restriction of glenohumeral movement in 49 of 76 shoulders (64.5%) preoperatively, including 36 of the 46 shoulders with fibrosis and 13 of the other 30 shoulders.

Conclusion

Both articular- and bursal-sided PTRCTs showed significant functional improvements after surgery. The articular-sided tears had a lower incidence of an acromial spur, but had a higher incidence of fibrosis in the rotator interval, which led to a limitation in glenohumeral motion.

Comparison of surgical outcomes between rotator cuff repair with and without rotator interval capsular release for rotator cuff tears to prevent and improve postoperative stiffness: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A common complication of rotator cuff (RC) repair is a postoperative stiffness. Postoperative stiffness may develop and lead to inferior functional outcomes. Rotator cuff repair with additional rotator interval (RI) capsular release can be done to prevent postoperative stiffness in rotator cuff tears. However, routine rotator interval capsular release in rotator cuff repair is controversial. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the postoperative outcomes between RC repair with and without RI capsular release for RC tears with and without concomitant stiffness.

METHOD

We searched all comparative studies that compared postoperative outcomes (VAS, CS, ASES, complications and ROM at 3, 6 and 12 months) of RC repair with and without RI capsular release for RC tears with and without concomitant stiffness from PubMed and Scopus databases from inception to the February 1, 2020.

RESULTS

Seven of 255 studies (six comparative studies and one RCT) (N = 803 patients) were eligible; 2 and 5 studies were included in the pooling of RC repair and RI release without concomitant stiffness and stiffness, respectively; 2, 6, 3, 6, 3, 5, 7, 7, and 7 studies were included in pooling of VAS, CS, ASES at 6 and 12 months and range of motion (internal, external rotation and forward flexion) at 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. The UMD of VAS, CS and ASES scores at 6- and 12-month follow-up for the RC repair and RI release group was 0.48 (95% CI: 0.05, 0.90), 0.93 (-1.70, 3.56), -2.27 (-5.30, 0.76), -0.04 (-0.24, 0.15), 1.66 (0.77, 2.55) and 1.58 (0.21, 2.96) scores when compared to RC repair alone with and without concomitant stiffness. In terms of ROM, forward flexion for the RC repair and RI release group was -4.60 (-10.61, 1.41), -7.11 (-15.47, 1.25) and -0.70 (-2.51, -1.11) degrees at 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively, when compared to RC repair alone. For external rotation, RC repair and RI release were -0.12 (-8.27, 8.03), -3.98 (-12.09, 4.14) and -2.65 (-5.35, 0.04) degrees at 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively, when compared to RC repair alone. For internal rotation in RC repair and RI release, the values were -1.22 (-1.97, - 0.48), -1.01 (-1.79, -0.23) and -0.19 (-1.13, 0.74) degrees at 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively, when compared to RC repair alone. There were no differences with a RR of 0.92 (0.46, 1.84) between the two groups in terms of complications. After subgroup analysis, RC repair with RI release had no clinically significant differences for pain, function and ROM when compared to RC repair alone in RC tear patients with and without preoperative stiffness.

CONCLUSIONS

RC repair with RI release in patients with and without preoperative stiffness had no statistically significant differences for pain, function (CS and ASES) and range of motion (FF, ER and IR) when compared to RC repair alone in RC injury patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.