Cargando…
Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial
PURPOSE: To evaluate if adding nanofractures to the footprint of a supraspinatus tear repair would have any effect in the outcomes at one-year follow-up. METHODS: Multicentric, triple-blinded, randomized trial with 12-months follow-up. Subjects with isolated symptomatic reparable supraspinatus tears...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8225541/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32488368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06073-7 |
_version_ | 1783712113618845696 |
---|---|
author | Ruiz Ibán, Miguel Angel Sanchez Alepuz, Eduardo Diaz Heredia, Jorge Hachem, Abdul-ilah Ezagüi Bentolila, Leon Calvo, Angel Verdú, Carlos de Rus Aznar, Ignacio Soler Romagosa, Francesc |
author_facet | Ruiz Ibán, Miguel Angel Sanchez Alepuz, Eduardo Diaz Heredia, Jorge Hachem, Abdul-ilah Ezagüi Bentolila, Leon Calvo, Angel Verdú, Carlos de Rus Aznar, Ignacio Soler Romagosa, Francesc |
author_sort | Ruiz Ibán, Miguel Angel |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To evaluate if adding nanofractures to the footprint of a supraspinatus tear repair would have any effect in the outcomes at one-year follow-up. METHODS: Multicentric, triple-blinded, randomized trial with 12-months follow-up. Subjects with isolated symptomatic reparable supraspinatus tears smaller than 3 cm and without grade 4 fatty infiltration were included. These were randomized to two groups: In the Control group an arthroscopic supraspinatus repair was performed; in the Nanofracture group the footprint was additionally prepared with nanofractures (1 mm wide, 9 mm deep microfractures). Clinical evaluation was done with Constant score, EQ-5D-3L, and Brief Pain Inventory. The primary outcome was the retear rate in MRI at 12-months follow-up. Secondary outcomes were: characteristics of the retear (at the footprint or at the musculotendinous junction) and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-one subjects were randomized. Two were lost to follow-up, leaving 69 participants available for assessment at 12-months follow-up (33 in the Control group and 36 in the Nanofracture Group). The Nanofracture group had lower retear rates than the Control group (7/36 [19.4%] vs 14/33 [42.4%], differences significant, p = 0.038). Retear rates at the musculotendinous junction were similar but the Nanofracture group had better tendon healing rates to the bone (34/36 [94.4%] vs. 24/33 [66.71%], p = 0.014). Clinically both groups had significant improvements, but no differences were found between groups. CONCLUSION: Adding nanofractures at the footprint during an isolated supraspinatus repair lowers in half the retear rate at 12-months follow-up. This is due to improved healing at the footprint. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00167-020-06073-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8225541 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82255412021-07-09 Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial Ruiz Ibán, Miguel Angel Sanchez Alepuz, Eduardo Diaz Heredia, Jorge Hachem, Abdul-ilah Ezagüi Bentolila, Leon Calvo, Angel Verdú, Carlos de Rus Aznar, Ignacio Soler Romagosa, Francesc Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Shoulder PURPOSE: To evaluate if adding nanofractures to the footprint of a supraspinatus tear repair would have any effect in the outcomes at one-year follow-up. METHODS: Multicentric, triple-blinded, randomized trial with 12-months follow-up. Subjects with isolated symptomatic reparable supraspinatus tears smaller than 3 cm and without grade 4 fatty infiltration were included. These were randomized to two groups: In the Control group an arthroscopic supraspinatus repair was performed; in the Nanofracture group the footprint was additionally prepared with nanofractures (1 mm wide, 9 mm deep microfractures). Clinical evaluation was done with Constant score, EQ-5D-3L, and Brief Pain Inventory. The primary outcome was the retear rate in MRI at 12-months follow-up. Secondary outcomes were: characteristics of the retear (at the footprint or at the musculotendinous junction) and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-one subjects were randomized. Two were lost to follow-up, leaving 69 participants available for assessment at 12-months follow-up (33 in the Control group and 36 in the Nanofracture Group). The Nanofracture group had lower retear rates than the Control group (7/36 [19.4%] vs 14/33 [42.4%], differences significant, p = 0.038). Retear rates at the musculotendinous junction were similar but the Nanofracture group had better tendon healing rates to the bone (34/36 [94.4%] vs. 24/33 [66.71%], p = 0.014). Clinically both groups had significant improvements, but no differences were found between groups. CONCLUSION: Adding nanofractures at the footprint during an isolated supraspinatus repair lowers in half the retear rate at 12-months follow-up. This is due to improved healing at the footprint. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00167-020-06073-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-06-01 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8225541/ /pubmed/32488368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06073-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020, corrected publication 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Shoulder Ruiz Ibán, Miguel Angel Sanchez Alepuz, Eduardo Diaz Heredia, Jorge Hachem, Abdul-ilah Ezagüi Bentolila, Leon Calvo, Angel Verdú, Carlos de Rus Aznar, Ignacio Soler Romagosa, Francesc Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial |
title | Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial |
title_full | Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial |
title_short | Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. a randomized controlled trial |
topic | Shoulder |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8225541/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32488368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06073-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ruizibanmiguelangel footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial AT sanchezalepuzeduardo footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial AT diazherediajorge footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial AT hachemabdulilah footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial AT ezaguibentolilaleon footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial AT calvoangel footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial AT verducarlos footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial AT derusaznarignacio footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial AT solerromagosafrancesc footprintpreparationwithnanofracturesinasupraspinatusrepaircutsinhalftheretearrateat1yearfollowuparandomizedcontrolledtrial |