A Rotator Cuff Tear Concomitant With Shoulder Stiffness Is Associated With a Lower Retear Rate After 1-Stage Arthroscopic Surgery

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.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Shoulder Stiffness With Rotator Cuff Repair Yields Similar Outcomes to Isolated Rotator Cuff Repair

Purpose

To compare patient-reported and surgical outcome measures in patients with and without secondary shoulder stiffness (SSS) undergoing rotator cuff repair (RCR).

Methods

Patients undergoing rotator cuff repair from 2014 to 2020 with complete patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) by the short-form 12 survey (SF-12) were retrospectively reviewed to identify if operative intervention for SSS was performed alongside the RCR. Those patients with operative intervention for SSS were propensity matched to a group without prior intervention for stiffness by age, sex, laterality, body mass index, diabetes mellitus status, and the presence of a thyroid disorder. The groups were compared by rotator cuff tear (RCT) size, surgical outcomes, further surgical intervention, rotator cuff retear rate, postoperative range of motion (ROM), and SF-12 results at 1 year after surgery. Delta values were calculated for component scores of the SF-12 and ROM values by subtracting the preoperative result from the postoperative result.

Results

A total of 89 patients with SSS were compared to 156 patients in the control group at final analysis. The patients in the SSS group experienced a significant improvement in the delta mental health component score (MCS-12) of the SF-12 survey that was not seen in the control group (P = .005 to P = .539). Both groups experienced significant improvement by the delta physical health component score (PCS-12) of the SF-12 survey (SSS: 7.68; P < .001; control: 6.95; P < .001). The SSS group also experienced greater improvement of their forward flexion (25.8° vs 12.9°; P = .005) and external rotation (7.13° vs 1.65°; P = .031) ROM than the control group.

Conclusions

Operative intervention of SSS at the time of RCR has equivalent postoperative SF-12 survey outcome scores when compared to patients undergoing RCR without preoperative stiffness despite those patients having lower preoperative scores.

Level of Evidence

Level III retrospective comparative study.

Postoperative Rehabilitation Following Rotator Cuff Repair

Postoperative rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair is essential for a positive patient outcome. Each patient should have a program tailored to their individual tear and repair characteristics. Their plan should be advanced according to their progress, with therapist and surgeon communication. The rehabilitation progresses through 4 stages. This begins with a period of immobilization, passive range of motion, and protecting the repair and ends with functional and sport-specific exercises. Rehabilitation advances in progress-based steps during 24 weeks. The rehabilitation process aims to balance healing of the tendon repair and the risk of postoperative stiffness.

Machine learning model successfully identifies important clinical features for predicting outpatients with rotator cuff tears

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to develop a machine learning model to identify important clinical features related to rotator cuff tears (RCTs) using explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) for efficiently predicting outpatients with RCTs.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a local clinical registry dataset was performed to include patients with shoulder pain and dysfunction who underwent questionnaires and physical examinations between 2019 and 2022. RCTs were diagnosed by shoulder arthroscopy. Six machine-learning algorithms (Stacking, Gradient Boosting Machine, Bagging, Random Forest, Extreme Gradient Boost (XGBoost), and Adaptive Boosting) were developed for the prediction. The performance of the models was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Brier scores, and Decision curve. The interpretability of the predicted outcomes was evaluated using Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) values.

RESULTS

A total of 1684 patients who completed questionnaires and clinical tests were included, and 417 patients with RCTs underwent shoulder arthroscopy. In six machining learning algorithms for predicting RCTs, the accuracy, AUC values, and Brier scores were in the range of 0.81-0.86, 0.75-0.92, and 0.15-0.19, respectively. The XGBoost model showed superior performance with accuracy, AUC, and Brier scores of 0.85(95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.87), 0.92 (95% confidence interval,0.90-0.94), and 0.15 (95% confidence interval,0.14-0.16), respectively. The Shapley plot showed the impact of the clinical features on predicting RCTs. The most important variables were Jobe test, Bear hug test, and age for prediction, with mean SHAP values of 1.458, 0.950, and 0.790, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The machine learning model successfully identified important clinical variables for predicting patients with RCTs. In addition, the best algorithm was also integrated into a digital application to provide predictions in outpatient settings. This tool may assist patients in reducing their pain experience and providing prompt treatments.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Sex Is Associated with the Success or Failure of Manipulation Alone for Joint Stiffness Associated with Rotator Cuff Repair

Purpose: One-stage arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with manipulation has been recently performed for rotator cuff tears with shoulder stiffness, whereas some patients require capsular release due to severe stiffness that is difficult to treat with manipulation. The purpose of this study was to analyze patient backgrounds and related factors of success or failure of manipulation alone for the treatment of shoulder stiffness associated with rotator cuff tears. Methods: This study included 64 patients with rotator cuff tears and shoulder stiffness who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with manipulation alone or with manipulation and capsular release of the glenohumeral joint at our institution between January 2015 and September 2019. The patients were divided into two groups: those whose shoulder stiffness could be improved by manipulation alone (Manipulation group) and those whose stiffness could not be improved by manipulation alone and required capsular release (Capsular release addition group). Analysis was performed between the two groups regarding patient backgrounds and related factors, including rotator cuff tear morphology and range of motions pre- and postoperatively. Results: Exactly 45 patients and 19 patients were included in Manipulation group and Capsular release addition group, respectively. A comparison between the two groups showed that patient age (p = 0.0040), sex (p = 0.0005), and injury due to trauma (p = 0.0018) were significantly related to the success or failure of manipulation alone. Multivariate logistic regression analysis on these three factors showed that sex (odds ratio, 5.5; p = 0.048) was significantly associated with the success or failure of manipulation alone. In both groups, the passive ROM of all patients improved at the last postoperative follow-up compared to their pre-operative values (p < 0.001), except for internal rotation in the Capsular release addition group (p = 0.49). Conclusion: Young male patients who have shoulder stiffness associated with rotator cuff tears should be considered for arthroscopic capsular release rather than manipulation.

Arthroscopic capsular release versus manipulation under anaesthesia for treating frozen shoulder - a prospective randomised study

PURPOSE

Arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) and Manipulation under anaesthesia(MUA) have been widely used in the treatment of frozen shoulder (FS). However, there is only limited Level-I evidence to prefer ACR over MUA. The purpose of our study was to conduct a randomised trial comparing ACR versus MUA to assess the difference in outcome, complications and cost-effectiveness of both procedures.

METHODS

From May 2020 to June 2021, patients presenting with FS were randomised into two groups ACR (n = 44) and MUA (n = 41). Patients with arthritis, full-thickness cuff tears, history of trauma/previous surgery around the shoulder were excluded from the study. Range of movement (ROM), pain grading using visual analogue scale (VAS), functional scores- UCLA, CONSTANT and EuroQol-5D scores were measured pre-operatively and post-operatively. MRI was done at three weeks post-operatively for screening complications of either procedure. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used for cost-analysis.

RESULTS

Post-operatively, patients had significant improvement in pain, ROM and functional scores in both groups (P < 0.001) with no significant difference between groups at 24 weeks of follow-up. Diabetic patients undergoing ACR had lesser improvement in abduction and external rotation when compared to non-diabetic patients. Labral tears in MUA group and bone bruises in ACR group were the most common complications noted on the post-operative MRI. For ACR cost per QALY gained was 896 USD while that for MUA was 424 USD.

CONCLUSION

Both ACR and MUA resulted in good improvement in pain and shoulder function. Good outcomes, simple technique and better cost-effectiveness would still make MUA an attractive option over ACR for treating FS.

Evaluation of Radiographic Changes 5 Years After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

Background:

Radiographic changes in the glenohumeral joint often occur after rotator cuff repair; however, the details of the progression and underlying causes remain unknown.

Purpose:

To retrospectively evaluate the timing and frequency of radiographic changes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and to clarify the predictive factors that affect the onset of such changes using multivariate analysis.

Study Design:

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed 100 patients with 5 years of follow-up after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and evaluated the postoperative shift in radiographic findings on plain radiographs every year during follow-up. Factors related to osteoarthritis, acromial spur re-formation, and greater tuberosity resorption at 5 years after surgery were evaluated using logistic regression analyses. Explanatory variables included preoperative factors, intraoperative factors, and postoperative retear. Baseline variables significant in the univariate analyses were included in the multivariate models.

Results:

Of the 100 patients, 12 developed osteoarthritis, 26 developed acromial spur formation, and 16 developed greater tuberosity resorption at 5 years after surgery. The incidence and grade of osteoarthritis and acromial spur gradually increased over time postoperatively. On the other hand, greater tuberosity resorption developed within 2 years after surgery but did not progress later. Multivariate analysis showed that a larger anteroposterior tear size (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.17; P = .037) was a risk factor for postoperative osteoarthritis. Early retear (OR, 10.26; 95% CI, 1.03-102.40; P = .047) was a risk factor for acromial spur re-formation. Roughness of the greater tuberosity (OR, 9.07; 95% CI, 1.13-72.82; P = .038) and larger number of suture anchors (OR, 3.34; 95% CI, 1.66-6.74; P = .001) were risk factors for greater tuberosity resorption.

Conclusion:

Our study showed that radiographic changes occurred in 40% of patients within 5 years after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. While the osteoarthritic changes and acromial spur re-formation gradually progressed postoperatively, the greater tuberosity resorption stopped within 2 years after surgery. Tear size, morphology of the greater tuberosity, and the number of suture anchors can affect radiographic changes. Furthermore, this study suggested that acromial spur re-formation may be an indicator of early retears.

Retear bigger than preoperative tear size would lead to treatment failure after rotator cuff repair

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to (1) define treatment failure using the referred patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) values for pain visual analog scale (PVAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) clinical scores and (2) identify the factors that lead to patient dissatisfaction after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR).

METHODS

We analyzed the arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery registry data from January 2015 to December 2016. Patients were followed for ≥2 years and categorized as dissatisfied or satisfied based on our own definition of treatment failure at 2 years postoperatively. For defining treatment failure, the referred PASS values for the PVAS, ASES, and SANE scores were used. Patients who failed to attain the PASS value for the PVAS, ASES, or SANE score were categorized into the dissatisfied group. Pre- and postoperative imaging and basic demographic data were compared between groups. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the factors affecting patient satisfaction at 2 years after rotator cuff repair.

RESULTS

Of 117 patients, 30 (25.6%) were defined as the dissatisfied group (mean follow-up period, 37.5 months). Seventeen patients (14.5%) had confirmed retear on follow-up magnetic resonance imaging. In the univariate analysis, sex significantly differed between the groups (female, satisfied vs. dissatisfied groups: 39 [44.8%] vs. 22 [73.3%]; P = .010). Retear alone did not affect patient satisfaction in the univariate analysis (P = .11). Progressed retear size featured a significantly higher risk of patient dissatisfaction (P = .024; odds ratio 6.430, 95% confidence interval 1.270-32.541) in the multivariable analysis using symptom duration, sex, preoperative ASES score, preoperative tear size, retear, and progressed retear size as variables. Moreover, female sex had an increased odds for dissatisfaction (odds ratio 4.646, 95% confidence interval 1.590-13.578; P = .005).

CONCLUSION

Two years after ARCR, most patients (74.4%) reported satisfaction with their outcomes. However, satisfaction levels can be altered by female sex or progressed retear size compared with the preoperative state.

Tear Size and Stiffness Are Important Predictors of Retear

This study aimed to identify whether early postoperative shoulder stiffness is associated with improved healing following rotator cuff repair, and if so, how this factor might interact with other factors known to affect rotator cuff repair integrity.

Anteroposterior tear size, age, hospital, and case number are important predictors of repair integrity: an analysis of 1962 consecutive arthroscopic single-row rotator cuff repairs

BACKGROUND

Retear or nonhealing of a surgically repaired rotator cuff is common, but the determinants of retear are poorly understood. We aimed to determine the relationship between preoperative and intraoperative factors and retear rate following rotator cuff repair and to formulate a predictive model based on this relationship, including any interaction effects between tear size, patient age, and surgical experience in contributing to the retear rate.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc analysis of prospectively collected data from 1962 consecutive patients who underwent a primary arthroscopic single-row rotator cuff repair performed by the senior author from 2007 through 2018 and postoperatively returned for 6-month follow-up ultrasonography.

RESULTS

Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed anteroposterior tear length to be the most important independent predictor of retear (Wald statistic, 90; P < .001). Other independent predictors included case number (Wald statistic, 59; P < .001), patient age at surgery (Wald statistic, 30; P < .001), and type of hospital (public vs. private) (Wald statistic, 17; P < .001). The data indicated that following rotator cuff repair, there was a 4-fold increase in the retear rate as the anteroposterior tear size increased from 1 cm to 3 cm; a 8-fold decrease when comparing case number 1000 with case number 3000; a 2-fold increase as patient age increased from 50 years to 70 years; and a 3-fold increase when comparing surgery performed in a public hospital vs. a private hospital. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.81 (95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.84), indicating that our equation could predict 81% of retears.

CONCLUSIONS

Anteroposterior tear length was the most important independent predictor of retear or nonhealing. Other predictive factors included case number, patient age at surgery, and hospital type. The predictive effect of anteroposterior tear length, patient age, and case number in contributing to retear was additive. Our regression equation may be used to calculate patient rotator cuff retear risk at 6 months after repair.

How to Assess Shoulder Functionality: A Systematic Review of Existing Validated Outcome Measures

The objective of this review was to compile validated functional shoulder assessment tools and analyse the methodological quality of their validations. Secondarily, we aimed to provide a comparison of the tools, including parameter descriptions, indications/applications, languages and operating instructions, to choose the most suitable for future clinical and research approaches. A systematic review (PRISMA) was conducted using: PubMed, WoS Scopus, CINHAL, Dialnet and reference lists until 2020. The main criteria for inclusion were that papers were original studies of validated tools or validation studies. Pre-established tables showed tools, validations, items/components, etc. The QUADAS-2 and COSMIN-RB were used to assess the methodological quality of validations. Ultimately, 85 studies were selected, 32 tools and 111 validations. Risk of bias scored lower than applicability, and patient selection got the best scores (QUADAS-2). Internal consistency had the highest quality and PROMs development the lowest (COSMIN-RB). Responsiveness was the most analysed metric property. Modified UCLA and SST obtained the highest quality in shoulder instability surgery, and SPADI in pain. The most approached topic was activities of daily living (81%). We compiled 32 validated functional shoulder assessment tools, and conducted an analysis of the methodological quality of 111 validations associated with them. Modified UCLA and SST showed the highest methodological quality in instability surgery and SPADI in pain.

Factors Influencing the Reparability and Healing Rates of Rotator Cuff Tears

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

To discuss tear- and patient-related factors that influence the healing potential of rotator cuff tears and to clarify the terminology surrounding this topic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last few years, further insight has been gained regarding rotator cuff tear features that are associated with poor healing rates after rotator cuff repair. Some of these features have been incorporated in prediction models developed to accurately predict rotator cuff healing rates utilizing preoperative risk factors weighted by importance. Rotator cuff tears may be considered functionally irreparable based on their size, chronicity, absence of adequate tendon length, atrophy, and fatty infiltration. Furthermore, advanced age, use of tobacco products, diabetes, and other patient-related factors may impair tendon healing. Careful analysis and discussion of all these factors with patients is essential to determine if surgical repair of a rotator cuff tear should be recommended, or if it is best to proceed with one of the several salvage procedures reviewed in this topical collection, including augmentation of the repair, superior capsular reconstruction, tendon transfers, and other.

Partial-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tear by Itself Does Not Cause Shoulder Pain or Muscle Weakness in Baseball Players

BACKGROUND

Partial-thickness rotator cuff tears are common shoulder injuries in baseball players. For some tears, the symptoms can be relieved through physical therapy or debridement without rotator cuff repair.

PURPOSE

To assess whether partial-thickness rotator cuff tear by itself causes shoulder pain and muscle weakness in baseball players.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

We studied 87 university baseball players (age, 19.5 ± 0.8 years; baseball career, 11.5 ± 1.6 years). All data were obtained during a full-participation annual medical check in 1 team. Rotator cuff tendons were examined ultrasonographically and allocated to 4 groups: (1) no tear, (2) supraspinatus tendon tear, (3) infraspinatus tendon tear, and (4) both supraspinatus and infraspinatus tendon tears. Current shoulder pain and shoulder muscle strength (dominant/nondominant) in abduction, external rotation, and internal rotation were compared by using chi-square and t tests. All players could play baseball with or without shoulder pain in this study.

RESULTS

Of the 87 players, 41 (47%) had articular-sided partial-thickness rotator cuff tears diagnosed on ultrasonography; the remaining 46 athletes were tear-free. Of the 41 affected patients, 19 had tears in the supraspinatus, 13 in the infraspinatus, and 9 in both the supraspinatus and infraspinatus tendons. Tear depth (mean ± SD) was 4.6 ± 2.3 mm in the supraspinatus and 6.2 ± 3.6 mm in the infraspinatus. Neither the rate of shoulder pain nor muscle strength differed significantly among the 4 groups (P = .96 and P = .15-.70, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Articular-sided partial-thickness rotator cuff tear-by itself-did not cause shoulder pain and muscle weakness in university baseball players. Most so-called articular-sided partial-thickness rotator cuff tears may not be pathologic tendon tears.

Management of Concomitant Preoperative Rotator Cuff Pathology and Adhesive Capsulitis: A Systematic Review of Indications, Treatment Approaches, and Outcomes

PURPOSE

Concomitant preoperative adhesive capsulitis (AC) and rotator cuff (RC) pathology pose therapeutic challenges in light of contrasting interventional and rehabilitative goals. The purposes of this systematic review were to assess the literature regarding the management and rehabilitation of patients with concomitant RC tears and preoperative AC and to compare overall clinical outcomes between strategies for this common scenario.

METHODS

In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 3 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed) were searched and screened in duplicate using predetermined criteria for studies on the aforementioned patient population. Descriptive statistics are presented.

RESULTS

Of 952 studies, 17 involving 662 shoulders, with a mean age of 59.6 ± 3.5 years, 57.9% female patients, and a mean follow-up period of 18.6 months, were included. Capsular release (CR) (86.1%) and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) (33.1%) were the most common co-interventions with RC repair. Across studies, mean preoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores ranged from 29.0 to 61.3, visual analog scale scores (pain) ranged from 5.3 to 8.0, and Constant scores ranged from 18.0 to 48.0. Mean postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores ranged from 76.9 to 92.0, visual analog scale scores (pain) ranged from 0.3 to 2.5, and Constant scores ranged from 72.6 to 93.2. Postoperative rehabilitation comprised abduction braces and passive range of motion immediately postoperatively for mean durations of 5.0 weeks and 5.3 weeks, respectively, followed by active range of motion at a mean of 5.3 weeks and strengthening at 10.9 weeks. Postoperative complications included stiffness, RC retear, instability, glenoid fracture, and superficial infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this systematic review support treatment of patients with degenerative RC tears and concomitant AC with a combination of RC repair and MUA, CR, or both MUA and CR. Regardless of the treatment modality, accelerated postoperative rehabilitative protocols are beneficial in preventing postoperative persistence of AC and can be safely used in this scenario without a substantial increase in complication rates compared with patients undergoing RC repair alone with conservative rehabilitation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V, systematic review of Level II, III, IV, and V studies.