Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2020 / Cilt: 54 - Sayı: 2

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

Pages
178–185
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

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

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study compared the clinical and radiological results of the arthroscopic transosseous (ATO) and transosseous-equivalent (TOE) double-row rotator cuff repair techniques.
📊
Key Findings & Data: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.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: In the treatment of rotator cuff tears, the ATO and TOE techniques may achieve considerable improvements in shoulder functions in the short term.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

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.

🔖

Cite This Article

FIRAT, A., AYDIN, M., TECİMEL, O., ÖÇGÜDER, A., SANİSOĞLU, Y., UĞURLU, M. (2020). Comparison of the clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic transosseous and transosseous-equivalent double-row rotator cuff repair techniques. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 54 - Sayı: 2, 178–185. https://ajindex.com/articles/143913

References (1)

  1. Baudi P, Dani RE, Campochiaro G, Rebuzzi M, Serafini F, Catani F. The rotator cuff tear repair with a new arthroscopic transosseous system: The Sharc-FT(®). Musculoskelet Surg 2013; 97(Suppl 1): 57-61. [CrossRef] 2. McLaughlin HL. Lesions of the musculotendinous cuff of the shoulder. The exposure and treatment of tears with retraction. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1944; 304: 3-9. 3. Charousset C, Grimberg J, Duranthon LD, Bellaiche L, Petrover D. Can a double-row anchorage technique improve tendon healing in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair?: A prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of double-row and single-row anchorage techniques with computed tomographic arthrography tendon healing assessment. Am J Sports Med 2007; 35: 1247-53. [CrossRef] 4. Park JY, Lhee SH, Choi JH, Park HK, Yu JW, Seo JB. Comparison of the clinical outcomes of single- and double-row repairs in rotator cuff tears. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36: 1310-6. [CrossRef] 5. Burks RT, Crim J, Brown N, Fink B, Greis PE. A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing arthroscopic single- and doublerow rotator cuff repair: Magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical evaluation. Am J Sports Med 2009; 37: 674-82. [CrossRef] 6. Kim DH, Elattrache NS, Tibone JE, et al. Biomechanical comparison of a single-row versus double-row suture anchor technique for rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34: 407-14. [CrossRef] 7. Lorbach O, Bachelier F, Vees J, Kohn D, Pape D. Cyclic loading of rotator cuff reconstructions: Single-row repair with modified suture configurations versus double-row repair. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36: 1504-10. [CrossRef] 8. Ma CB, Comerford L, Wilson J, Puttlitz CM. Biomechanical evaluation of arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs: Double-row compared with single-row fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 403-10. [CrossRef] 9. Nelson CO, Sileo MJ, Grossman MG, Serra-Hsu F. Single-row modified Mason-Allen versus double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: A biomechanical and surface area comparison. Arthroscopy 2008; 24: 941-8. [CrossRef] 10. Smith CD, Alexander S, Hill AM, et al. A biomechanical comparison of single and double-row fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 2425-31. [CrossRef] 11. Park MC, Tibone JE, ElAttrache NS, Ahmad CS, Jun BJ, Lee TQ. Part II: Biomechanical assessment for a footprint-restoring transosseous equivalent rotator cuff repair technique compared with a double-row repair technique. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2007; 16: 46