Journals / Düzce Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1

Comparative Study of the Functional and Clinical Outcomes of Two Different Rotator Cuff Repair Techniques: Suture Anchor versus Transosseous Sharc-FT

Rotator Manşet Onarımında İki Farklı Tekniğin Fonksiyonel ve Klinik Sonuçlarının Karşılaştırmalı Olarak İncelenmesi: Sütür Ankor ve Transosseöz Sharc-FT

Pages
36–42
Publication Date
2022-10-12
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)

On the basis of the post-hoc test results, the postoperativeconstant score was significantly higher in Group 2 compared with that in Group 1 (P

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare the functional and clinical outcomes of suture anchor andtransosseous Sharc-FT fixation options in mini-open repair of rotator cuff tears.Material and Methods: Between January 2010 and July 2016, 60 patients were operated on in the Orthopedics andTraumatology Clinics of Duzce University Hospital and Duzce State Hospital.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Thirty patients in whom repair wasperformed with suture anchor (Group 1) and 30 patients in whom repair was performed with Transosseous Sharc-FT®(Group 2) were compared.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:On the basis of the post-hoc test results, the postoperativeconstant score was significantly higher in Group 2 compared with that in Group 1 (P
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare the functional and clinical outcomes of suture anchor andtransosseous Sharc-FT fixation options in mini-open repair of rotator cuff tears.Material and Methods: Between January 2010 and July 2016, 60 patients were operated on in the Orthopedics andTraumatology Clinics of Duzce University Hospital and Duzce State Hospital. Thirty patients in whom repair wasperformed with suture anchor (Group 1) and 30 patients in whom repair was performed with Transosseous Sharc-FT®(Group 2) were compared. Preoperative and postoperative shoulder ranges of motion, the visual analog scale scores,constant shoulder scores, Oxford shoulder scores, and Q-DASH shoulder scores were evaluated in Group 1 and Group 2patients.Results: A total of 62% of the participants were male and 38% were female. Gender distribution was homogeneous inboth groups (P=0.426). The mean age of the subjects was 57.35 ± 8.69 (41-78) years. No significant difference wasnoted between the groups in terms of mean age (P=0.232). On the basis of the post-hoc test results, the postoperativeconstant score was significantly higher in Group 2 compared with that in Group 1 (P

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, rotator manşet yırtıklarında sütür ankor ve transosseöz sharc-FT fiksasyon seçeneklerinin miniaçık onarımının fonksiyonel ve klinik sonuçlarını karşılaştırmayı amaçladık. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Ocak 2010 - Temmuz 2016 arasında Düzce Üniversitesi Hastanesi Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Kliniğinde ve Düzce Devlet Hastanesi Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Kliniğinde Ocak 2010 - Temmuz 2016 tarihleri arasında 60 hasta ameliyat edildi. 30 hasta sütür ankor (grup 1) ile tamir edilen ve 30 Transosseöz Sharc -FT® (grup 2) ile ameliyat edilen hastalar karşılaştırıldı. Preoperatif ve postoperatif omuz hareket açıklığı, VAS skoru, Constant omuz skoru, Oxford omuz skoru ve Q-DASH omuz skoru grup 1 ve 2 hastada değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Katılımcıların %62’si erkek, %38'si kadındı. Gruplara göre cinsiyet dağılımı homojendi (P=0,426). Deneklerin yaş ortalaması 57,35 ± 8,69 (41-78) idi. Gruplar arasında yaş ortalaması açısından anlamlı fark yoktu (P=0,232). Post-hoc testine göre, ameliyat sonrası Constant skoru Grup 2'de Grup 1'den anlamlı olarak yüksek bulundu (P

🔖

Cite This Article

KARADUMAN, Z. O., TURHAN, Y., ARICAN, M., TURHAL, O., CANGÜR, Ş., SOLAK, K., AKKURT, M. O. (2022). Comparative Study of the Functional and Clinical Outcomes of Two Different Rotator Cuff Repair Techniques: Suture Anchor versus Transosseous Sharc-FT. Düzce Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1, 36–42. https://ajindex.com/articles/494730

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Gerber C, Schneeberger AG, Beck M, Schlegel U. Mechanical strength of repairs of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994; 76(3): 371-80
  2. Buess E, Steuber KU, Waibl B. Open versus arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a comparative view of 96 cases. Arthroscopy. 2005; 21(5): 597-604
  3. Galatz LM, Ball CM, Teefey SA, Middleton WD, Yamaguchi K. The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86(2): 219-24
  4. Harryman DT 2nd, Mack LA, Wang KY, Jackins SE, Richardson ML, Matsen FA 3rd. Repairs of the rotator cuff: correlation of functional results with integrity of the cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991; 73(7): 982-9
  5. Morse K, Davis AD, Afra R, Kaye EK, Schepsis A, Voloshin I. Arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: a comprehensive review and metaanalysis. Am J Sports Med. 2008; 36: 1824-8
  6. Razmjou H. Evaluating equivalency of treatment effectiveness: the example of arthroscopic and miniopen rotator cuff repairs. Hand Clin.2009; 25(1): 67- 70
  7. Brady PC, Arrigoni P, Burkhart SS. Evaluation of residual rotator cuff defects after invivo single- versus double-row rotator cuff repairs. Arthroscopy. 2006; 22(10): 1070-5
  8. Brown MJ, Pula DA, Kluczynski MA, Mashtare T, Bisson LJ. Does suture technique affect re-rupture in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? A meta-analysis. Arthroscopy. 2015; 31(8): 1576-82
  9. Burkhart SS, Adams CR, Burkhart SS, Schoolfield JD. A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques of footprint reconstruction for rotator cuff repair: the SwiveLock-Fiber Chain construct versus standard double-row repair. Arthroscopy. 2009; 25(3): 274-81
  10. Garofalo R, Castagna A, Borroni M, Krishnan SG. Arthroscopic transosseous (anchorless) rotator cuff repair. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012; 20(6): 1031-5
  11. Goutallier D, Postel JM, Radier C, Bernageau J, Zilber S. Long-term functional and structural outcome in patients with intact repairs 1 year after open transosseous rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009; 18(4): 521-8
  12. Kim KC, Rhee KJ, Shin HD, Kim YM. Arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair. Orthopedics. 2008; 31(4): 327-30. 13.Baudi P, Rasia Dani E, Campochiaro G, Rebuzzi M, Serafini F, Catani F. The rotator cuff tear repair with a new arthroscopic transosseous system: the SharcFT(®). Musculoskelet Surg. 2013; 97(Supp l): 57-61
  13. Kuroda S, Ishige N, Mikasa M. Advantages of arthroscopic transosseous sutu