Comparison of Clinical and Structural Outcomes of Open and Arthroscopic Repair for Massive Rotator Cuff Tear.
10.5397/cise.2016.19.2.60
- Author:
Nam Su CHO
;
Sang Won CHA
;
Hee Seok SHIM
;
Hyung Suk JUH
;
Yong Girl RHEE
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Shoulder;
Rotator cuff;
Tendon injuries;
Massive;
Open;
Arthroscopy
- MeSH:
Arthroscopy;
California;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Retrospective Studies;
Rotator Cuff*;
Shoulder;
Tears*;
Tendon Injuries
- From:Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
2016;19(2):60-66
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Management of massive rotator cuff tears can be challenging because of the less satisfactory results and a higher retear rate regardless of the use of open or arthroscopic repair technique. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 102 cases of massive rotator cuff tear treated with either open or arthroscopic repair. Open repair was performed in 38 patients; and arthroscopic repair, in 64 patients. The mean age at the time of surgery was 59.7 years in the open group and 57.6 years in the arthroscopic group. RESULTS: The Constant score increased from the preoperative mean of 55.9 to 73.2 at the last follow-up in the open repair group and from 53.8 to 67.6 in the arthroscopic repair group (p<0.001 and <0.001, respectively). The University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) score increased from a preoperative mean of 17.7 to 30.8 at the last follow-up in the open group and from 17.5 to 28.7 in the arthroscopic group (p<0.001 and <0.001, respectively). No statistically significant difference in the Constant and UCLA scores was observed between the two groups at the last follow-up (p=0.128 and 0.087, respectively). Retear was found in 14 patients (36.8%) in the open group and 39 patients (60.9%) in the arthroscopic group (p=0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Open and arthroscopic repairs of massive rotator cuff tears may provide satisfactory clinical results with no significant difference. However, a significantly lower retear rate was observed for the open repair group compared with the arthroscopic repair group.
