Cargando…

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate and compare the results of single-row (SR) vs. double-row (DR) arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. METHODS: From December 2009 to May 2013, 115 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs were performed using suture anchors. After applying the exclusion criteria, there were 75 patients (79 s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Senna, Luís Filipe, Ramos, Max Rogério Freitas, Bergamaschi, Ricardo Folador
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6052182/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30027077
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rboe.2018.05.010
_version_ 1783340623390048256
author Senna, Luís Filipe
Ramos, Max Rogério Freitas
Bergamaschi, Ricardo Folador
author_facet Senna, Luís Filipe
Ramos, Max Rogério Freitas
Bergamaschi, Ricardo Folador
author_sort Senna, Luís Filipe
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Evaluate and compare the results of single-row (SR) vs. double-row (DR) arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. METHODS: From December 2009 to May 2013, 115 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs were performed using suture anchors. After applying the exclusion criteria, there were 75 patients (79 shoulders) to be evaluated, retrospectively, of whom 53 (56 shoulders) attended re-evaluation. The patients were divided into two groups: SR with 29 shoulders, and DR) with 27 shoulders. The scoring systems for clinical evaluation were those of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES). RESULTS: The mean follow-up period in the SR group was 37.8 months vs. 41.0 months in the DR group. The average UCLA score was 30.8 in the SR group vs. 32.6 in the DR group. This difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The averages measured by the ASES score also showed no significant difference – 82.3 and 88.8 in the SR and DR groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant difference was found between SR and DR arthroscopic rotator cuff repair performed by a single surgeon in the comparative analysis of UCLA and ASES scores.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6052182
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60521822018-07-19 Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years Senna, Luís Filipe Ramos, Max Rogério Freitas Bergamaschi, Ricardo Folador Rev Bras Ortop Original Article OBJECTIVE: Evaluate and compare the results of single-row (SR) vs. double-row (DR) arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. METHODS: From December 2009 to May 2013, 115 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs were performed using suture anchors. After applying the exclusion criteria, there were 75 patients (79 shoulders) to be evaluated, retrospectively, of whom 53 (56 shoulders) attended re-evaluation. The patients were divided into two groups: SR with 29 shoulders, and DR) with 27 shoulders. The scoring systems for clinical evaluation were those of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES). RESULTS: The mean follow-up period in the SR group was 37.8 months vs. 41.0 months in the DR group. The average UCLA score was 30.8 in the SR group vs. 32.6 in the DR group. This difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The averages measured by the ASES score also showed no significant difference – 82.3 and 88.8 in the SR and DR groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant difference was found between SR and DR arthroscopic rotator cuff repair performed by a single surgeon in the comparative analysis of UCLA and ASES scores. Elsevier 2018-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6052182/ /pubmed/30027077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rboe.2018.05.010 Text en © 2018 Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Senna, Luís Filipe
Ramos, Max Rogério Freitas
Bergamaschi, Ricardo Folador
Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years
title Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years
title_full Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years
title_fullStr Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years
title_full_unstemmed Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years
title_short Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years
title_sort arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6052182/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30027077
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rboe.2018.05.010
work_keys_str_mv AT sennaluisfilipe arthroscopicrotatorcuffrepairsinglerowvsdoublerowclinicalresultsafteronetofouryears
AT ramosmaxrogeriofreitas arthroscopicrotatorcuffrepairsinglerowvsdoublerowclinicalresultsafteronetofouryears
AT bergamaschiricardofolador arthroscopicrotatorcuffrepairsinglerowvsdoublerowclinicalresultsafteronetofouryears