Effects of arthroscopic vs. mini-open rotator cuff repair on function, pain & range of motion. A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6822715 | BioStudies |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies
Similar Datasets
Project description:The objective of this study was to compare outcomes in patients with rotator cuff tears undergoing all-arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair. A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes of all-arthroscopic repair versus mini-open repair in patients with rotator cuff repair was conducted. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were screened and included from systematic literature search for electronic databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL library was conducted from 1969 and 2015. A total of 18 comparative studies including 4 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. Pooled results indicate that there was no difference in the functional outcomes, range of motion, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and short-form 36 (SF-36) subscales. However, Constant-Murley functional score was found to be significantly better in patients with mini-open repair. However, the results of the review should be interpreted with caution due to small size and small number of studies contributing to analysis in some of the outcomes. All-arthroscopic and mini-open repair surgical techniques for the management of rotator cuff repair are associated with similar outcomes and can be used interchangeably based on the patient and rotator tear characteristics.
2016-01-01 | S-EPMC4780011 | BioStudies
Project description:We compared the clinical and quality of life related outcome of rotator cuff repair performed using either a mini-open or an arthroscopic technique for rotator cuff tears of less than 3 cm. The records of 64 patients who underwent rotator cuff repair between September 2003 and September 2005 were evaluated. Thirty-two patients underwent a mini-open rotator cuff repair, and 32 patients underwent an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The mean follow-up period was 31 months in the mini-open group and 30.6 months in the arthroscopic group (P > 0.05). The UCLA rating system, range of motion examination and the self-administered SF-36 used for postoperative evaluation showed a statistically significant improvement from the preoperative to the final score for both groups (P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference in the total UCLA scores was found when comparing the two repair techniques (P > 0.05). This study suggests that there is no difference in terms of subjective and objective outcomes between the two surgical procedures studied if patients have rotator cuff tears of less than 3 cm.
2010-01-01 | S-EPMC2899299 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears, although commonly performed, carries the risk of retears. Therefore, bioremediation techniques such as platelet-rich plasma injections have been used as adjuvant therapies. The clinical efficacy of platelet-rich plasma in the arthroscopic repair of full-thickness rotator cuff injury is controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of platelet-rich plasma and provide evidence-based medical recommendations for selecting the proper clinical treatment plan for full-thickness rotator cuff injuries.<h4>Methods</h4>A search for the terms "platelet-rich plasma" and "rotator cuff" was performed in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases using a computer. After conducting quality evaluations and data extraction, RevMan 5.3 software was used to combine the effect sizes, and the GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool was used to rate the level of evidence from aspects of functional score, pain score and retear rate.<h4>Results</h4>Eight randomized controlled trials involving 566 patients were included. The long-term retear rate(RR = 0.96, 95% CI [0.52, 1.78], P = .89), Constant score(RR = 0.96, 95% CI [0.52, 1.78], P = .89), and Visual Analog Scale score for pain (SMD = -0.28, 95% CI [-0.60, 0.04], P = .08), as well as both the long-term and short-term Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores(SMD = -0.13, 95% CI [-0.44, 0.18], P = .41;SMD = -0.02, 95% CI [-0.40, 0.36], P = .93), were not significantly different between the platelet-rich plasma and control groups. However, the short-term retear rate(RR = 0.29, 95% CI [0.13, 0.65], P = .003) and Visual Analog Scale score (SMD = -0.41, 95% CI [-0.62, -0.19], P = .0002) were significantly lower, while the short-term Constant score(SMD = 0.37, 95% CI [0.19, 0.55], P < .0001) and short-term and long-term University of California at Los Angeles activity scores (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI [0.16, 0.60], P = .0008;SMD = 0.85, 95% CI [0.48, 1.22], P < .00001) were significantly higher, in the platelet-rich plasma group than in the control group.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Platelet-rich plasma injection can effectively improve the short-term outcomes following arthroscopic repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears, thus reducing the rate of retears, alleviating pain, and improving patients' shoulder function. Specifically, the clinical outcomes are better with the use of platelet-rich plasma in single-row fixation than in other fixation techniques. Therefore, platelet-rich plasma injection can be recommended as an adjuvant therapy in single-row repair for improved short-term results.
| S-EPMC6663026 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>To investigate the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection among patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy in comparison with sham injection, no injection, or physiotherapy alone.<h4>Methods</h4>From the earliest records to November 1, 2018, all published or unpublished randomized controlled trial (RCTs) comparing PRP injection with a control group (sham injection, no injection, or physiotherapy alone) in patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy were included. Eligible trials were included from the search results of electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, as well as the bibliographies of relevant trials. Five RCTs were enrolled in our meta-analysis. Two authors independently assessed the quality of RCTs with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We designated pain reduction as the primary outcome and functional improvement as the secondary outcome. Standardized mean difference (SMD) was applied for random-effect meta-analysis.<h4>Results</h4>In the short term (3-6 weeks) and medium term (12 weeks), the effectiveness of PRP injection and control group was indistinguishable in terms of both outcomes (pain reduction and functional improvement). Nevertheless, PRP injection led to significant long-term (>24 weeks) pain relief (SMD: 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.12-0.72, without heterogeneity). For functional improvement in the long term, PRP injection was not more effective than the control group (SMD: 1.20, 95% CI: -0.20-2.59, with heterogeneity).<h4>Conclusions</h4>PRP injection may provide benefit over the control group (sham injection, no injection, or physiotherapy alone) in reducing pain at long-term follow-up for patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy.
| S-EPMC7235747 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Purpose</h4>The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of patients with full-thickness small to large sized tears undergoing all-arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair.<h4>Method</h4>A literature search for electronic databases and references for eligible studies was conducted through Medline, Embase and Cochrane library between 1969 and 2013.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 12 comparative studies (n = 770 patients) were included. Pooled results showed: there were no differences in function outcome, pain scores, retear rate or the incidence of adhesive capsulitis between all arthroscopic and mini-open repair groups.<h4>Conclusions</h4>There were no differences in outcomes between the arthroscopic and mini-open rotator cuff repair techniques, they should be considered alternative treatment options.<h4>Level of evidence</h4>Level IV, Meta analysis.
| S-EPMC3984182 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Scientific evidence is not clear regarding the routine use of acromioplasty in the treatment of rotator cuff repair. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without concomitant acromioplasty.<h4>Methods</h4>Medline, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were searched to identify eligible studies focused on arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without acromioplasty from January 2000 to February 2018. Postoperative functional outcomes, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and reoperation rate were extracted for systemic analysis.<h4>Results</h4>Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one cohort study (CS), including 651 patients, fulfilled our selection criteria. The results showed a significant difference in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, but not in the Constant score, University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) score, or Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score, in the treatment of rotator cuff tear with or without concomitant acromioplasty at the final follow-up. In the subgroup analysis, the results showed no significant differences between the two treatments in reoperation rate at the final follow-up or VAS score at 6 months postoperatively and final follow-up, but there was a significant difference in VAS score at 12 months postoperatively in favor of acromioplasty treatment. The evidence quality for each outcome evaluated by the GRADE system was low.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In summary, our present study demonstrated that acromioplasty treatment is significantly superior to nonacromioplasty in shoulder pain relief at 12 months postoperatively and in ASES score improvement at the final follow-up in conjunction with rotator cuff repair. However, these significant differences were not clinically relevant. Thus, there were no differences in shoulder function or pain scores for patients undergoing rotator cuff repair with and without acromioplasty. Further high-quality studies with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-ups are needed to clarify this issue.
| S-EPMC6237382 | BioStudies
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>Shoulder pain due to irreparable rotator cuff tears can cause substantial disability, but treatment options are limited. A balloon spacer is a relatively simple addition to a standard arthroscopic debridement procedure, but it is costly and there is no current randomised trial evidence to support its use. This trial will evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a subacromial balloon spacer for individuals undergoing arthroscopic debridement for irreparable rotator cuff tears.New surgical procedures can provide substantial benefit to patients. Good quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are needed, but trials in surgery are typically long and expensive, exposing patients to risk and the healthcare system to substantial costs. One way to improve the efficiency of trials is with an adaptive sample size. Such methods are well established in drug trials but have rarely, if ever, been used in surgical trials.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>Subacromial spacer for Tears Affecting Rotator cuff Tendons: a Randomised, Efficient, Adaptive Clinical Trial in Surgery (START:REACTS) is a participant and assessor blinded, adaptive, multicentre RCT comparing arthroscopic debridement with the InSpace balloon (Stryker, USA) to arthroscopic debridement alone for people with a symptomatic irreparable rotator cuff tear. It uses a group sequential adaptive design where interim analyses are performed using all of the 3, 6 and 12-month data that are available at each time point. A maximum of 221 participants will be randomised (1:1 ratio), this will provide 90% power (at the 5% level) for a 6 point difference in the primary outcome; the Oxford Shoulder Score at 12 months. A substudy will use deltoid-active MRI scans in 56 participants to assess the function of the balloon. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis and reported according to principles established in the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement.<h4>Ethics and dissemination</h4>NRES number 18/WM/0025. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, presentations at conferences, lay summaries and social media.<h4>Trial registration number</h4>ISRCTN17825590.
| S-EPMC7247380 | BioStudies
Project description:Introduction:Retrospective evaluation of rotator cuff repair with arthroscopic or arthroscopic-assisted mini-open methods for a diagnosis of non-retracted rotator cuff tear. Materials and methods:A total of 45 patients underwent rotator cuff repair; Group 1 (n?=?24) with arthroscopic-assisted mini-open method and Group 2 (n?=?21) with full arthroscopic method. Results:Within both Group 1 and Group 2, a statistically significant results is p?=?0.001. The patients of Group 2 were seen to return to daily life earlier than those of Group 1 (p?=?0.001). Conclusions:Patients where full arthroscopic repair was applied, there was evidence of an earlier return to daily life. Level of evidence:IV, retrospective comparative study.
| S-EPMC6118155 | BioStudies
Project description:Transosseous rotator cuff tear repair was first described in 1944. Over the years, it has represented the gold standard for such lesions. Through open and mini-open approaches, as well as the arthroscopic approach, the transosseous repair system represents one of the most reliable surgical techniques from a biological and mechanical perspective. Nevertheless, further improvements are required. This article describes an arthroscopic rotator cuff tear transosseous repair system, developed in collaboration with NCS Lab (Carpi, Italy): the Sharc-FT using the Taylor Stitcher. Our first experience in the clinical application of the arthroscopic technique using the transosseous suture system has shown encouraging clinical outcomes, confirming its efficacy. The patient satisfaction rate was high, and no patient expressed concern about the implant. The complication rate was very low. By improving the suture technique in the treatment of rotator cuff tears, a remarkable increase in the success rate in the treatment of this pathology could be reached; nevertheless, complications such as retears of the rotator cuff still occur.
| S-EPMC5465308 | BioStudies
Project description:Rotator cuff tears are the most common source of shoulder pain and disability. Only poor quality studies have compared mini-open to arthroscopic repair, leaving surgeons with inadequate evidence to support optimal, minimally-invasive repair.This randomized, multi-centre, national trial will determine whether an arthroscopic or mini-open repair provides better quality of life for patients with small or moderate-sized rotator cuff tears. A national consensus meeting of investigators in the Joint Orthopaedic Initiative for National Trials of the Shoulder (JOINTS Canada) identified this question as the top priority for shoulder surgeons across Canada. The primary outcome measure is a valid quality-of-life scale (Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC)) that addresses 5 domains of health affected by rotator cuff disease. Secondary outcomes will assess rotator cuff functionality (ROM, strength, Constant score), secondary dimensions of health (general health status (SF-12) and work limitations), and repair integrity (MRI). Outcomes are measured at baseline, at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months post-operatively by blinded research assistants and musculoskeletal radiologists. Patients (n = 250) with small or medium-sized cuff tears identified by clinical examination and MRI who meet eligibility criteria will be recruited. This sample size will provide 80% power to statistically detect a clinically important difference of 20% in WORC scores between procedures after controlling for baseline WORC score (alpha = 0.05). A central methods centre will manage randomization, data management, and monitoring under supervision of experienced epidemiologists. Surgeons will participate in either conventional or expertise-based designs according to defined criteria to avoid biases from differential surgeon expertise. Mini-open or all-arthroscopic repair procedures will be performed according to a standardized protocol. Central Adjudication (of cases), Trial Oversight and Safety Committees will monitor trial conduct. We will use an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), where the baseline WORC score is used as a covariate, to compare the quality of life (WORC score) at 2 years post-operatively. As a secondary analysis, we will conduct the same statistical test but will include age and tear size as covariates with the baseline score. Enrollment will require 2 years and follow-up an additional 2 years. The trial will commence when funding is in place.These results will have immediate impact on the practice behaviors of practicing surgeons and surgical trainees at JOINTS centres across Canada. JOINTS Canada is actively engaged in knowledge exchange and will publish and present findings internationally to facilitate wider application. This trial will establish definitive evidence on this question at an international level.
| S-EPMC1421402 | BioStudies