Midterm clinical outcomes following arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair

Anchorless Arthroscopic Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair

Background

Rotator cuff repair techniques have evolved over time. The original techniques were open procedures, then surgeons adopted arthroscopic repair procedures with anchors and implants. Today, rotator cuff repair has evolved to be performed as an arthroscopic transosseous technique that is again performed without the use of anchors.

Description

In this video, the 5 essential steps of arthroscopic transosseous repair will be demonstrated. (1) Position the patient in either the beach chair or lateral decubitus position. (2) Utilize 4-portal arthroscopy, which allows a consistent vantage point while having 3 other portals for instrumentation. (3) Perform just enough bursectomy to expose the rotator cuff. (4) Anatomically reduce the rotator cuff anatomy where possible. (5) Triple-load the transosseous tunnels with high-strength sutures in order to maximize the biomechanical strength of the repair.

Alternatives

Alternative surgical techniques include open rotator cuff repair and single and double-row rotator cuff repair using anchors.

Rationale

The goal of any rotator cuff repair is to anatomically restore the rotator cuff. The fundamental principles include a strong initial biomechanical fixation, cuff footprint anatomy restoration, and maximization of biological factors to promote healing of the rotator cuff. Rotator cuff repair was originally performed as an open procedure, which allows for direct visualization of the tear and repair; however, open repair requires some level of deltoid splitting, which can potentially affect postoperative early mobilization. Single-row and double-row cuff repairs can both be performed arthroscopically. Proponents of the double-row procedure prefer that technique for its footprint restoration and stronger biomechanical fixation; however, the double-row procedure can result in overtensioning of the repair and can lead to medial-based rotator cuff failures. Proponents of the single-row procedure prefer that technique for its ease of operation, fewer implants, lower cost, and low repair tension; however, the single-row procedure fixes the tendon at a single point, limiting the repaired footprint, and can be associated with lower fixation strength. The arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair achieves all of the above goals as it provides strong initial fixation and anatomic footprint restoration, which allows maximal patient biology for healing.

Expected Outcomes

There are numerous studies that can attest to the success of arthroscopic transosseous repair. Some of the benefits include decreased health-care costs and postoperative pain levels. In a 2016 study of 109 patients undergoing arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair, Flanagin et al. reported a mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score of 95 and a failure rate of 3.7% at mid-term follow-up1. Similarly, in a study comparing transosseous repair to transosseous equivalent repair, Srikumaran et al. reported that patients undergoing transosseous repair had a mean ASES score of 92 and a failure rate of 14%, with no significant differences between treatment groups2. Finally, in a study assessing the results of arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair at >10 years postoperatively, Plachel et al. reported a mean ASES score of 92 and a failure rate of 27%3.

Important Tips

Compared with conventional rotator cuff with anchors, the transosseous cuff repair can lead to cut-out of the repair sutures from the bone.Use a 4-portal arthroscopy technique, which will help the surgeon visualize all tear configurations while instrumenting them.Perform just enough bursectomy, in order to preserve the growth factors for cuff healing.Take care to minimize tuberosity trauma as a result of burring.Prepare the transosseous tunnels with a wide bone bridge.Load each tunnel with 3 high-strength sutures in order to maximize repair strength.Restore the rotator cuff footprint to facilitate tissue healing.

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ASES = American Shoulder and Elbow SurgeonsRCR = rotator cuff repairATRCR = arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repairARCR = arthroscopic rotator cuff repairPDS = polydioxanone sutureROM = range of motionSSV = Subjective Shoulder ValueFF = forward flexionOR = operating roomFU = follow-up.

Can the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation be used as a stand-alone subjective outcome instrument in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair?

BACKGROUND/HYPOTHESIS

There is no consensus to which patient-determined shoulder outcome scores should be considered when analyzing patient outcomes. Use of multiple patient-determined outcomes may be redundant and cause increased responder burden. The Single Assessment Numeric (SANE) has not been widely accepted as a stand-alone shoulder-specific outcome measure. The hypothesis was that SANE will correlate with and be comparable in responsiveness to other subjective outcome measures that have been used in a stand-alone fashion in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form [ASES], Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index [WORC], and the Simple Shoulder Test [SST]). In addition, the SANE will be more relevant to each patient compared to the ASES, further supporting its use as a stand-alone shoulder-specific outcomes measure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a database of patients undergoing rotator cuff repair was reviewed where the SANE was recorded with the ASES, WORC, and/or SST. Correlations were determined using the Pearson coefficient. Subgroup analysis was performed to determine if correlations differed in (1) preoperative and (2) postoperative outcome determinations. Responsiveness was determined by calculating the standardized response mean (SRM) and the effect size (ES) of all scores. Relevance and precision of the SANE and ASES were examined using 150 consecutive patients to determine the number of questions in each score that were not answered.

RESULTS

Correlation was excellent for the SANE and the ASES (n = 1838, r = 0.81, P < .0001), the WORC (n = 1793, r = 0.82, P < .0001), and the SST (n = 1836, r = 0.76, P < .0001). Correlation of preoperative scores was moderate and postoperative scores were excellent when comparing the SANE with all 3 scores. All scores were highly responsive, with the SRM of the SANE = 2.1, ASES = 2.2, WORC = 2.4, and the SST = 1.8. The ES of the SANE = 2.4, ASES = 2.7, WORC = 3.0, and the SST = 2.1. One hundred percent of the SANE scores were answered completely compared with 57% (P < .0001) of the ASES, with significant variability found in the answers to the "work" and "score" questions.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing rotator cuff repair, the SANE highly correlated and has equivalent responsiveness with the WORC, ASES, and SST, which have been used as stand-alone shoulder-specific outcomes measures. The SANE may provide the same information as the WORC, ASES, and SST regarding outcome with significant reduction in responder burden. This study supports that the SANE can be used as a subjective, stand-alone instrument for patients undergoing rotator cuff repair.

Arthroscopic Anchorless Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair Produces Equivalent Clinical Outcomes and Imaging Results as a Standard Suture Bridge Technique with Anchors

Purpose

To compare the clinical and imaging outcome of arthroscopic transosseous (TO)-equivalent rotator cuff repair (RCR) with anchors with arthroscopic anchorless TO RCR at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively.

Methods

The study population included patients who underwent RCR using either an anchorless TO technique with a TO suture passing device (group A) and those who were matched for tear size and underwent RCR using suture anchors for repair (group B). The inclusion criterion was an easily reducible rotator cuff tear with a sagittal extension of 2 to 4 cm. After a minimum of 2 years, clinical outcome scores and magnetic resonance imaging were obtained. Tendon quality and footprint integration were evaluated using the Sugaya classification.

Results

Seventy patients were included. A total of 45 were in group A and 25 were in group B. Group A had 2 bone tunnels and 4 sutures using an X-box configuration, and group B had a suture bridge construct of 4 anchors. Group A and B had identical anteroposterior tear size and were comparable for age. The Constant score improved from 50 ± 17.4 to 88 ± 8.6 in group A versus 48 ± 14.5 to 87 ± 7.2 in B. The Subjective Shoulder Value rose from 47 ± 19.1 to 95 ± 7.4 in group A vs from 47 ± 19.4 to 95 ± 7.6 in B. Neither the preoperative (P ≥ .502) nor postoperative scores (P ≥ .29) showed a significant difference. Magnetic resonance imaging showed 2 small retears in group A and one in B, resulting in an identical 4% retear rate. The mean Sugaya type was 2.02 versus 2.24 (P = .206) for groups A versus B.

Conclusions

Anchorless TO RCR is a valid alternative to suture anchor techniques. Clinical outcome data showed comparable results for both techniques after a follow-up of 2 years. The healing results as observed on magnetic resonance imaging were also equivalent for both groups.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

The functional outcome of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row knotless vs knot-tying anchors

To date two main techniques are used in arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff tears, the conventional knot-tying suture bridge technique and the knotless technique. We evaluated whether there is a difference in clinical outcome using both techniques. Our patients underwent arthroscopic treatment of full-thickness rotator cuff tears, and we retrospectively evaluated clinical function, strength and surgery time. Eighty-three shoulders operated between September 2012 and December 2013 were included in the study. We had nineteen patients in the knotless group, and sixty-four in the knot-tying group. In addition, we performed preoperatively radiological (magnetic resonance imaging-MRI) conformation of full-thickness rotator cuff tear in our patients. For clinical evaluation, we used Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (q-DASH) and the Shoulder Pain and Disability (SPADI) score, and we measured the strength of a range of motion postoperatively using a conventional dynamometer. The patients were evaluated preoperatively, and at 6, 9, and 12 months postoperatively. The follow-up period was 12 months. The scores in both treatment groups improved at twelve months follow-up, but there was no statistical difference between both groups at twelve months after surgery; q-DASH score between groups (p = 0.092) and SPADI score (p = 0.700). Similarly, there was no statistical difference between the groups in regard to strength, surgery time, and range of motion at the twelve months follow-up. Our data confirm that both techniques may be used successfully to repair full-thickness rotator cuff tears with very good functional outcome.Level of evidence IV.

Functional outcomes of arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair using a 2-mm tape suture in a 137-patient cohort

Background

Although being the historical gold standard for rotator cuff repair, open transosseous (TO) repair was largely replaced by anchor-based methods with the advent of arthroscopic surgery owing to their comparative ease of use. However, suture anchors are at risk of dislodgement, especially among older patients, who have more osteopenic bone or those presenting large tears. Considering the ever-increasing active life expectancy and associated increased quality of life expectations by older generations, the need to offer safe and efficient surgical treatments to these patients imposes itself. Arthroscopic TO repairs would combine the best of both worlds and be well adapted to these populations. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the functional outcome and complication rate of the TO arthroscopic repair technique when using a 2-mm braided suture tape. The secondary objective of this study was to assess functional outcome of TO repair in older patients and patients with >3-cm tears.

Methods

One hundred thirty-seven consecutive patients with full-thickness rotator cuff tear who underwent arthroscopic TO (anchorless) rotator cuff repair between January 2011 and December 2013 were reviewed. The surgery was performed by a single surgeon with a reusable curved suture passer and 2-mm braided tape suture. Follow-up was 3 to 5 years (mean = 50 months). All patients underwent preoperative and postoperative functional assessments (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Quick Dash) and were questioned with their overall satisfaction.

Results

Thirty-eight (28%) of the 137 patients were 65 years and older, and 62 (45%) had a large or massive tear. One patient (0.7%) had early retear at the suture-tendon interface after trauma 3 weeks postoperatively. The average Quick Dash score improved by 55.6 points and the average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved by 69.7 points 3.5 and 6.3 times their minimal clinically important differences, respectively. There was no significant difference in final functional outcomes between patients 65 years and older and younger patients or between patients with large and massive (>3 cm) and smaller tears (≤3 cm). Mean operative time was 68 min ± 16.

Conclusions

Arthroscopic TO repair using a 2-mm tape material has achieved significant mid-term functional improvement, with results statistically unaffected by larger tear size (>3 cm) or older age (≥65 years).

Anchorless Arthroscopic Transosseous and Anchored Arthroscopic Transosseous Equivalent Rotator Cuff Repair Show No Differences in Structural Integrity or Patient-reported Outcomes in a Matched Cohort

BACKGROUND

Anchored transosseous equivalent suture-bridge technique (TOE) is widely used for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. It is unknown how patient outcomes scores, ROM, and integrity of the rotator cuff after repair using this anchored technique compare with those after repair using an anchorless transosseous technique (TO).

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What are the differences in patient-reported outcomes (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] score) and shoulder ROM between TO and TOE rotator cuff repair techniques at 1 and 2 years after surgery? (2) What is the difference in repair integrity as measured by the re-tear rate, assessed ultrasonographically at 1 year, between these two techniques? (3) What is the difference in procedure duration between the two techniques when performed by a surgeon familiar with each?

METHODS

We reviewed 331 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs performed by one surgeon from December 2011 to July 2016 in this retrospective, matched-pair study. Of these patients, 63% (208 of 331) underwent repair with standard anchored technique (anchors placed in a double-row, TOE manner) and 37% (123 of 331) underwent anchorless TO repair, with the same indications for surgery between groups. Forty-four percent (91 of 208) of patients in the TOE group and 61% (75 of 123) of patients in the TO group met the inclusion criteria. Eighty percent (73 of 91) of patients in the TOE group and 88% (66 of 75) in the TO group had minimum 2-year follow-up. We matched each group to a cohort of 50 patients by sex, age, smoking status, and tear size (by Cofield classification: small, < 1 cm; medium, 1-3 cm; large, > 3-5 cm; or massive, > 5 cm). The resulting cohorts did not differ in mean age (TO, 62 years [range 53-65 years]; TOE, 58 years [range 53-65 years]; p = 0.79), mean BMI value (TO, 30 [range 27-33]; TOE, 29 [range 27-35]; p = 0.97), or dominant arm involvement (TO, 80%; TOE, 78%; p = 0.81). The cohorts were followed for at least 2 years (median, 3.2 years [interquartile range (IQR) 2.2-4.3] for TO and 2.9 years [IQR 2.0-3.5 years] for TOE). ASES scores and ROM were evaluated before surgery and at follow-up visits and were recorded in a longitudinally maintained institutional database. Repair integrity was assessed using ultrasonography at 1 year, as is standard in our practice. For each tear-size group, we calculated the proportion of intact tendon repairs versus the proportion of re-tears. Duration of surgery was recorded for each patient.

RESULTS

At 1 year, we observed no difference in median ASES scores (90 [IQR 92-98] for TO and 88 [IQR 72-98] for TOE; p = 0.44); external rotation (50° [IQR 45°-60°) for TO and 50° [IQR: 40°-60°] for TOE; p = 0.58); forward flexion (165° [IQR 160°-170°] for both groups; p = 0.91); or abduction (100° [IQR 90°-100°] for TO and 90° [IQR 90°-100°] for TOE; p = 0.06). Fourteen percent of shoulders (seven of 50) in each treatment group had evidence of re-tear at 1 year (p > 0.99): 0 of 2 small tears in each group, 0 of 7 medium tears in each group, five of 32 large tears in each group, and two of 9 massive tears in each group (all, p > 0.99). At 2 years, we found no differences in median ASES scores (92 [IQR 74-98)] for TO and 90 [IQR 80-100] for TOE; p = 0.84); external rotation (60° [IQR 50°-60°] for both groups; p = 0.74); forward flexion (170° [IQR 160°-170°] for both groups; p = 0.69); or abduction (100° [IQR 90°-100°] for both groups; p = 0.95). We found no differences between groups in mean ± SD procedure time, which was 103 ± 20 minutes for TO repair and 99 ± 20 minutes for TOE repair (p = 0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

TO and TOE techniques for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair results in no differences in ROM, ASES scores, re-tear rates, and surgical time. Randomized control trials are needed to confirm these similarities or determine a superior method of repair. Future cost analyses may also help to determine the relative value of each technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Comparison of the clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic transosseous and transosseous-equivalent double-row rotator cuff repair techniques

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the clinical and radiological results of the arthroscopic transosseous (ATO) and transosseous-equivalent (TOE) double-row rotator cuff repair techniques.

METHODS

Prospective data collected from patients treated with ATO (32 women and 7 men, mean age: 57.03±6.39 years) and TOE (36 women and 8 men; mean age: 57.86±7.81 years) techniques were retrospectively evaluated. The visual analog scale score, Constant score, and Oxford shoulder score were used to assess the clinical results. Anchor pullout on standard anteroposterior shoulder radiographs and rotator cuff re-tear on magnetic resonance images were examined at the final follow-up to evaluate the radiological results. Rotator cuff re-tears were graded as per the classification system described by Sugaya et al. Results: The mean follow-up duration was 33.3±11.8 months. No difference was observed in the demographic data of the two groups. Significant improvement was observed in the postoperative shoulder scores of the groups; however, no difference was observed between the groups. Re-tear was detected in 10 patients of the TOE group and 9 patients of the ATO group. Age, tear size, and retraction level could cause re-tear.

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of rotator cuff tears, the ATO and TOE techniques may achieve considerable improvements in shoulder functions in the short term.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Therapeutic study.

True Transosseous Hybrid Rotator Cuff Repair

Transosseous repair has been used safely and effectively for primary and revision rotator cuff repair for decades; as a result, it is considered by many the historical gold standard of open repair techniques. Transosseous repair offers the advantage of excellent biology, double-row anatomic footprint reconstruction, and the ability to create multiple low-cost fixation points per surface area of tendon with high-strength suture, while avoiding anchor pullout, cyst formation, and imaging artifact. More recently, in arthroscopic applications, transosseous-equivalent anchor-based repairs have been introduced that have shown satisfactory clinical and biomechanical results; however, these attributes have been coupled with increased cost, nonbiologic burden to the healing interface of the tendon, and new catastrophic failure modes including tendon transection, anchor pullout, and bone voids. This article delineates a technique for arthroscopic true transosseous hybrid cuff repair that combines the use of anchors and transosseous techniques to maximize the benefits and minimize the detriments of both techniques. Level 1 (shoulder); level 2 (rotator cuff).

Is Arthroscopic Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair Strength Dependent on the Tunnel Angle?

Background

Previous studies have aimed to biomechanically improve the transosseous tunnel technique of rotator cuff repair. However, no previous work has addressed tunnel inclination at the time of surgery as an influence on the strength of the repair construct.

Hypothesis

We hypothesized that the tunnel angle and entry point would influence the biomechanical strength of the transosseous tunnel in rotator cuff repair. Additionally, we investigated how tunnel length and bone quality affect the strength of the repair construct.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

Mechanical testing was performed on 10 cadaveric humeri. Variations in the bone tunnel angle were imposed in the supraspinatus footprint to create lateral tunnels with inclinations of 30°, 45°, and 90° relative to the longitudinal axis of the humeral shaft. A closed loop of suture was passed through the bone tunnel, and cyclic loading was applied until failure of the construct. Load to failure and distance between entry points were the dependent variables. Analysis of variance, post hoc paired t tests, and the Bonferroni correction were used to analyze the relationship between the tunnel angle and failure load. The Pearson correlation coefficient was then used to evaluate the correlation of the distance between entry points to the ultimate failure load, and t tests were used to compare failure loads between healthy and osteoporotic bone.

Results

Tunnels drilled perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis (90°) achieved the highest mean failure load (167.51 ± 48.35 N). However, there were no significant differences in the failure load among the 3 tested inclinations. Tunnels drilled perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis (90°) measured 13.86 ± 1.35 mm between entry points and were significantly longer (P = .03) than the tunnels drilled at 30° and 45°. We found no correlation of the distance between entry points and the ultimate failure load. Within the scope of this study, we could not identify a significant effect of bone quality on failure load.

Conclusion

The tunnel angle does not influence the strength of the bone-suture interface in the transosseous rotator cuff repair construct.

Clinical Relevance

The transosseous technique has gained popularity in recent years, given its arthroscopic use. These findings suggest that surgeons should not focus on the tunnel angle as they seek to maximize repair strength.

Arthroscopic Transosseous Anchorless Rotator Cuff Repair Using the X-Box Technique

We describe a reproducible, step-by-step arthroscopic technique for anchorless transosseous rotator cuff repair using an X-box configuration with the Arthrotunneler device. The technique uses 2 bone tunnels and 4 high-strength sutures and is suitable for medium to large tears of the supra- and infraspinatus that would alternatively need a double-row repair with 4 anchors. Biomechanically, results appear to be similar as for anchored transosseous equivalent techniques. Enhanced biological healing and lower material costs are the possible benefits of this appealing arthroscopic approach that mimics the previous gold standard.

Optimal Angle of the Bone Tunnel for Avoiding Axillary Nerve Injuries During Arthroscopic Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Simulation Study

Background

Axillary nerve injury and suture cutout through the roof of the tunnel are potential complications of arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair (ATORCR).

Purpose

To determine a safe angle of drilling for the bone tunnel during ATORCR such that the axillary nerve is not at risk. The thickness of the bone bridge over the tunnel for different angles of drilling was also determined.

Study Design

Descriptive laboratory study.

Methods

The drilling of a straight tunnel was simulated on 30 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in the oblique coronal plane by drawing a straight line that passed at a "safe distance" of 5 mm from the axillary nerve and emerging at the medial border of the insertion of the rotator cuff on the greater tuberosity. The angle made by this line with the horizontal axis of the humerus was measured on 3 MRI sections: anterior (passing just posterior to the lateral lip of the bicipital groove), middle (at the most lateral point of the proximal humerus), and posterior (an equal number of cuts away from the middle section as between anterior and middle). The thickness of the overlying bone roof was measured for this line as well as for simulation lines drawn at 50°, 55°, 60°, and 65° with the horizontal axis. A "safe limit," defined as the mean - 2SD, was also calculated.

Results

The axillary nerve was found to be safe, with a safety margin of 5 mm, at drill angles of less than 61.1° and 60.3° in the posterior and middle sections, respectively. The safe limit value for thickness of the overlying bone roof for the tunnel drilled at 60° was 5.0 mm in the posterior section (mean, 8.2 ± 0.3 mm) and 5.5 mm in the middle section (mean, 8.1 ± 0.2 mm). In the anterior section, the minimum safe angle was 57.7°, and the mean thickness of the bone roof for the 55° angle was 6.3 ± 0.2 mm (safe limit, 3.7 mm).

Conclusion

Straight bone tunnels in ATORCR surgery should be drilled at an angle of 60° to the horizontal axis of the humerus or 30° to the humeral shaft to ensure the safety of the axillary nerve while at the same time ensuring adequate thickness of the overlying bone roof. The anterior tunnel close to the bicipital groove should be drilled cautiously at 55° to the horizontal axis or 35° to the humeral shaft.

Clinical Relevance

The findings of the present study will help the surgeon choose the best angle for drilling tunnels during ATORCR surgery to avoid axillary nerve injuries as well as suture cut-through without the need for any proprietary device.

Rotator cuff failure after surgery: an all-arthroscopic transosseous approach

BACKGROUND

Tear recurrence is considered the main complication of a rotator cuff repair. The best arthroscopic technique has not yet been established. The aim of the present study was to evaluate, from a clinical and a radiological standpoint, the all-arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair with cortical lateral augmentation, performed in the setting of a revision surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eleven consecutive cases were prospectively followed up for a minimum of 12 month after a rotator cuff repair with a novel all-arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair. VAS and UCLA score and patients' satisfaction with the outcomes were analyzed, along with MRI evolution of the repair. All patients underwent a standardized surgery and postoperative rehabilitation program.

RESULTS

All patients showed a significant improvement in pain reduction and functional score. Satisfaction was achieved in 10 out of 11 cases, and only 1 case showed a minor discontinuous tendon signal on the 12-month MRI assessment. No complications were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results favor the use of the all-arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff revision surgery with the 2MC configuration (double MC means the initials of the authors-MM and CC, who have originally described it). It appears to be safe and effective, providing good clinical, functional, and radiological results, with a very high patient satisfaction.

Is there a difference in clinical outcomes and repair integrity between arthroscopic single-row versus transosseous (anchorless) fixation? A retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated clinical and structural outcomes after transosseous (TO) repair. The purpose of this study was to compare structural and clinical outcomes of rotator cuff tear, repaired arthroscopically, with a single row (SR) or transossoeus (TO) anchorless technique.

METHODS

96 patients who underwent an arthroscopic repair for superior or posterosuperior rotator cuff tear using TO (n:54) or a SR (n:42) were retrospectively enrolled in this study after evaluation of clinical and surgical notes. Functional evaluation was performed with the adjusted Constant score, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. Postoperative cuff integrity was determined through MRI study.

RESULTS

Patients were recalled after a minimum follow-up of two years. All the patients were available for the study. In the SR group the Constant rating system showed a significant improvement from a preoperative average rating of 44.8 to an average of 85.7. In the group of TO repair the Constant rating system showed a significant improvement from a preoperative average of 46.1 to an average of 87.6 postoperatively. According to ASES index scores, the average total score improved from 42.8 to 92.0 in the anchor group and from 40.4 to 94.6 in the TO group. There was no statistical difference between the two groups about clinical outcomes. Postoperative MRI revealed no differences in term of complete re-tears between the two techniques. In the SR group at MRI we observe significant more cases of rotator cuff with a Sugaya type III healing.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair yielded successful clinical outcomes using SR and TO technique. However using the TO technique we saw less type 3 Sugaya readings on MRI suggesting a possible benefit with TO repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II

Retrospective study.

The effect of deep shoulder infections on patient outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a retrospective comparative study

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of deep shoulder infections after RCR on patient outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted involving all patients with deep shoulder infections after arthroscopic RCR (study group). Another group of patients who were matched with the study group by age, gender and rotator cuff tear size, and did not develop deep shoulder infections after arthroscopic RCR were randomly identified (control group). The two groups were compared in terms of time to start physiotherapy, shoulder function, and delay in return to work.

Results

There were 10 patients in each group. The mean time to start physiotherapy after surgery was 145.3 (SD=158.8) days for the study group and 40.0 (SD=13.7) days for the control group (p=.051). The average forward elevation of the operated shoulder was 133 (SD=33.4) degrees for the study group, and 172 (SD=12.0) degrees for the control group (p=0.003). The average time to return to work at preoperative level was 5.6 months for the study group and 3 months for the control group.

Conclusion

Deep shoulder infections after RCR significantly impedes time to start physiotherapy, shoulder function, and patients' ability to return to work.

Level of evidence

III b [retrospective comparative (case-control) study].

Arthroscopic trans-osseous rotator cuff repair

BACKGROUND

Mechanical factors are at the basis of any tendon healing process, being pressure an aspect able to positively influence it. For this reason transosseous rotator cuff repair represents the gold standard procedure for patients affected by a cuff tear, maximizing the tendon footprint contact area and reducing motion at the tendon to bone interface.

METHODS

The Authors present an all arthroscopic suture bridge-like transosseous repair with the preparation of a single transosseous tunnel perfor med thanks to a precise dedicated instrument (Compasso®) and one implant (Elite-SPK®) with the use of only 3 suture wires. In addition this technique permits to accurately prepare the bony side of the lesion without any risk or complication, such as anchor pull-out and greater tuberosity bone osteolysis.

CONCLUSIONS

However, even if this technique seems less demanding, the arthroscopic transosseous repair is still an advanced procedure, and should be performed only by well prepared arthroscopic shoulder surgeons.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

V.

Advantages of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair With a Transosseous Suture Technique: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Rotator cuff tear is a common finding in patients with painful, poorly functioning shoulders. The surgical management of this disorder has improved greatly and can now be fully arthroscopic.

PURPOSE

To evaluate clinical and radiological results of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using 2 different techniques: single-row anchor fixation versus transosseous hardware-free suture repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Sixty-nine patients with rotator cuff tears were enrolled: 35 patients were operated with metal anchors and 34 with standardized transosseous repair. The patients were clinically evaluated before surgery, during the 28 days after surgery, and at least 1 year after the operation by the use of validated rating scores (Constant score, QuickDASH, and numerical rating scale [NRS]). Final follow-up was obtained at more than 3 years by a QuickDASH evaluation to detect any difference from the previous follow-up. During the follow-up, rotator cuff integrity was determined through magnetic resonance imaging and was classified according to the 5 Sugaya categories.

RESULTS

Patients operated with the transosseous technique had significantly less pain, especially from the 15th postoperative day: In the third week, the mean NRS value for the anchor group was 3.00 while that for transosseous group was 2.46 ( P = .02); in the fourth week, the values were 2.44 and 1.76, respectively ( P < .01). No differences in functional outcome were noted between the 2 groups at the final evaluation. In the evaluation of rotator cuff repair integrity, based on Sugaya magnetic resonance imaging classification, no significant difference was found between the 2 techniques in terms of retear rate ( P = .81).

CONCLUSION

No significant differences were found between the 2 arthroscopic repair techniques in terms of functional and radiological results. However, postoperative pain decreased more quickly after the transosseous procedure, which therefore emerges as a possible improvement in the surgical repair of the rotator cuff. Registration: NCT01815177 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair: the eight-shape technique

All-arthroscopic anchorless transosseous suture techniques combine the advantages of the open transosseous repair with the benefits of arthroscopic technique. However, all the techniques described until now are very complex, difficult to reproduce and associated with an increased surgical time. The authors developed a novel all-arthroscopic anchorless transosseous suture technique easy to perform and to reproduce. This procedure maximizes the tendon-footprint contact area obtaining both medial and lateral fixation without using any device, employing only 1 suture tape so to avoiding the risk of suture twist. The preparation of two transosseous tunnels is very easily and safely performed thanks to a dedicated instrument. The procedure is described in details. Moreover, the preliminary favorable results after a minimum follow-up of 12 months are reported.