Clinical outcome of arthroscopic partial and complete repair in patients of massive rotator cuff tear
10.3760/cma.j.cn121113-20240129-00067
- VernacularTitle:关节镜下部分和完全修补巨大肩袖撕裂的临床疗效
- Author:
Lin LIN
1
;
Fengyuan ZHAO
;
Jiahao ZHANG
;
Xin YAN
;
Chunming KE
;
Guoqing CUI
;
Hui YAN
Author Information
1. 北京大学第三医院运动医学科（北京大学运动医学研究所），北京 100191
- Keywords:
Rotator cuff injuries;
Arthroscopy;
Reconstructive surgical procedures;
Treatment outcome
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics
2024;44(14):963-969
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy of arthroscopic partial and complete repair for massive rotator cuff tears.Methods:A total of 32 patients who underwent arthroscopic partial repair of massive rotator cuff tears in the Department of Sports Medicine, Peking University Third Hospital from March 2016 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed, including 15 males and 17 females, aged 62±6.8 years (range, 51-77 years), with 5 cases on the left side and 27 cases on the right side. Cause of injury: 4 cases were injured by car accident, 8 were injured by fall, and 20 had no obvious cause. 32 patients who underwent arthroscopic complete repair of massive rotator cuff tears during the same period were included according to a sample size of 1∶1 matched based on age, sex, tear size and fat infiltration index. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder score, Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score, and range of motion. Fatty infiltration and cuff healing were assessed using the Goutallier and Sugaya classifications on MRI, respectively.Results:All patients successfully completed the surgery and were followed up for 46.1±11.3 months (range, 36-72 months). Preoperative and final follow-up VAS scores were 6.6±1.8 and 1.6±1.1 in the complete repair group, and 6.4±1.9 and 1.4±1.3 in the partial repair group. Both groups showed significant postoperative improvement ( P<0.05), with no significant difference between groups at the final follow-up ( t=-0.729, P=0.468). The ASES score, UCLA shoulder score, and SST at the final follow-up were 81.7±6.5, 28.6±2.9, and 9.8±2.5, respectively, in the complete repair group, and 82.4±7.3, 28.1±2.6, and 9.1±1.9 in the partial repair group, and the difference between the groups was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). In the complete repair group, one case underwent reverse shoulder replacement for rotator cuff re-tear two years after surgery, and one case developed pseudoparalysis for rotator cuff re-tear 8 months after surgery but had no significant pain and did not receive further treatment; in the partial repair group, two cases underwent tendon transposition surgery for shoulder pain. Conclusion:Arthroscopic partial repair improves shoulder function and reduces pain in patients with massive rotator cuff tears, with similar efficacy to complete repair and has high surgical safety.
