The effect of biceps tenotomy on humeral migration and clinical outcomes in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of biceps tenotomy on humeral migration and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff (RC) repair.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 60 patients who underwent arthroscopic RC repair. Patients were divided into two groups, whether they underwent concomitant biceps tenotomy or not. The group underwent concomitant biceps tenotomy, tenotomy ( +), or not, tenotomy (-). Clinical and functional outcomes were performed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), the University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) scoring system. Radiological evaluation was performed in X-rays and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), measuring the acromiohumeral distance (AHD), humeral migration (HM) and upper migration index (UMI).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of patient characteristics. The follow-up period was 30.9 ± 8.7 months in the tenotomy ( +) group and 34.9 ± 8.2 months in the tenotomy (-) group with no significant difference. Postoperative ASES score improved significantly in the tenotomy ( +) group compared to the tenotomy (-) group (91.2 ± 4.7, 80.8 ± 18.7, respectively, p = 0.005). There was a significant difference in postoperative AHD, HM and UMI values (MRI; p = 0.003, p = 0.017, p = 0.025; X-ray; p = 0.049, p = 0.002, p = 0.010, respectively). The post-pre difference increase of AHD [MRI for tenotomy( +): 0.14 ± 0.86 and tenotomy(-): 0.91 ± 0.85, p = 0.001; X-ray for tenotomy( +): 0.61 ± 0.43 and tenotomy(-): 1.12 ± 0.7, p = 0.001] and UMI [MRI for tenotomy( +): 0.005 ± 0.05 and tenotomy(-): 0.04 ± 0.06, p = 0.006; X-ray for tenotomy( +): 0.01 ± .064 and tenotomy(-): 0.12 ± 0.37, p = 0.110] values were higher in the tenotomy (-) group compared to the tenotomy ( +) group while HM values decreased more in the tenotomy (-) group. [MRI for tenotomy ( +): -0.19 ± 1.07 and tenotomy (-): -0.79 ± 1.52, p = 0.079; X-ray for tenotomy ( +): -0.27 ± 0.54 and tenotomy (-): -1.006 ± 1.83, p = 0.040].

CONCLUSION

After short-term follow-up, the humeral head was positioned higher in patients who underwent LHBT tenotomy compared to patients without tenotomy. However, it seems to affect clinical outcomes during this period positively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

Factors associated with the development of re-tear following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: A retrospective comparative study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze the risk factors for the development of re-tear following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair (aRCR).

METHODS

This retrospective clinical study included 196 consecutive aRCRs with a minimum 3-year follow-up. Pre- and postoperative clinical and functional outcomes were measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), the University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale (UCLA), the Constant-Murley Score (CMS), and the Douleur Neuropathique (DN4) questzionnaire. The Goutallier staging of fatty infiltration, Occupational Ratio (OR), the Acromiohumeral Interval (AHI), Acromioclavicular Joint (ACJ) arthritis, acromion type, Critical Shoulder Angle (CSA), and tangent sign (tan- sign) were evaluated as radiological parameters. Different subgroup parameters were evaluated after dividing the patients into re-tear (-) and re-tear (+) groups, according to clinical and radiological outcomes as well as patient and intraoperative characteristics.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 72.0 ± 15.8 months. The mean age at the time of surgery was 58.4 ± 8.9 years. A significant improvement was found in clinical and functional scores in the re-tear (-) group (P < 0.001 for all). However, the retear (+) group had poorer outcome scores than the re-tear (-) group. Twenty patients (10.2%) had re-tear at the last follow-up. There was a significant difference between groups regarding pre-and postoperative clinical scores, with worse scores in the retear (+) group (P < 0.001 for all). Also, pre-and postoperative pseudoparalysis (P = 0.001 for both), acromioclavicular joint arthritis (ACJ) (P = 0.001), intraoperative rotator cuff wear (P = 0.007) or stiffness (P = 0.025), a longer time period between symptom onset and surgery (P = 0.031), larger tear size (P = 0.010), preoperative shoulder stiffness (P = 0.001), higher duration of postoperative analgesia use (P < 0.001), higher degrees of preoperative Occupational Ratio (OR) (P < 0.001), and higher degrees of fatty degeneration (P < 0.001) were found to be associated with re- tear development.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons should consider the preoperative degree of fatty degeneration, clinical and functional scores, presence of ACJ arthritis, intraoperative tendon quality, tear size and chronicity as well as postoperative prolong analgesic requirement, and development of pseudoparalysis as factors regarding re-tear development risk following aRCR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, Therapeutic Study.