Comparison of double-pulley suture-bridge and traditional suture bridge in arthroscopic repair of small and medium-sized supraspinatu tendon tears: clinical outcomes and costs
10.3760/cma.j.cn115530-20250809-00310
- VernacularTitle:关节镜下双滑轮缝线桥与传统缝线桥技术修复中小型冈上肌腱撕裂的疗效与费用的比较
- Author:
Peiguan HUANG
1
;
Xiaoxu WANG
1
;
Bei WANG
1
;
Guanghua TAN
1
;
Liang HONG
1
;
Fang WANG
1
;
Zhi ZENG
1
;
Saiyun LEI
1
;
Mingjun QIU
1
;
Huyong YAN
1
;
Chunrong HE
1
;
Haoqiang SONG
1
Author Information
1. 南华大学附属第二医院关节外科，衡阳 421001
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Arthroscopy;
Shoulder joint;
Shoulder pain;
Double-pulley suture-bridge;
Supraspinatus
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
2025;27(11):960-967
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the clinical outcomes and costs in arthroscopic repair of small and medium-sized supraspinatu tendon tears between double-pulley suture-bridge (DPSB) and traditional suture bridge (SB).Methods:A retrospective study was conducted at Department of Joint Surgery, The Second Hospital Affiliated to Hengyang Medical School to analyze the data of 26 patients with small and medium-sized supraspinatus tendon tears who had been treated by SB repair from May 2018 to December 2020 (SB group) and those of 35 patients with small and medium-sized supraspinatus tendon tears who had been treated by DPSB repair from January 2021 to December 2022 (DPSB group). There were 61 patients in the 2 groups, including 44 males and 17 females, with an age of (59.1±7.5) years. The left shoulder was affected in 26 patients and the right shoulder in 35 patients. The tear size was small in 25 cases and medium in 36 ones. The total number of anchors used, total anchoring costs, and surgical time were recorded and compared between the 2 groups. Visual analogue scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) score and shoulder range of motion were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the 2 groups before surgery and at the last follow-up. Comparisons were made within and between the 2 groups. Tendon integrity was assessed using MRI or ultrasound at 3, 6, 12 months or at the last follow-up.Results:There was no statistically significant difference in the preoperative general data between the 2 groups, indicating comparability ( P>0.05). DPSB and SB groups were followed up for (28.1±3.5) and (27.1±1.8) months, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between DPSB group and SB group in surgical time or total number of anchors ( P>0.05). The total costs of anchoring in DPSB group [(6,028.6±173.4) yuan] were significantly lower than those in SB group [(13,257.1±554.2) yuan] ( P<0.05). At the last follow-up, the anterior flexion, abduction, external rotation and internal rotation of the shoulder, as well as VAS pain score, ASES score and UCLA score, were significantly better in both DPSB group and SB group than their preoperative values ( P<0.05), but there were no statistically significant differences between DPSB group and SB group ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference either in tendon retear between DPSB group (2 cases) and SB group (1 case) ( P>0.05). No such complication as wound infection or nerve damage was found in either group. Conclusions:In arthroscopic repair of small and medium-sized supraspinatu tendon tears, both DPSB and SB techniques can achieve satisfactory and comparable clinical outcomes. However, DPSB leads to lower total costs of anchoring.
