Cargando…

Comparison of Locking-Loop Suture Bridge Repair and Single-Row Suture Anchor Repair in Small to Medium Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective Cohort Study With Clinical and Ultrasound Evaluations

BACKGROUND: Single-row (SR) and double-row repair techniques have been described to treat rotator cuff tears. We present a novel surgical strategy of arthroscopic-assisted mini-open repair in which a locking-loop suture bridge (LLSB) is used. PURPOSE: To compare the functional outcomes and repair in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Yu-Chun, Chen, Hung-Chou, Wong, Chin-Chean, Chang, Wen-Pei, Lin, Chun-Hao, Liaw, Chen-Kun, Chen, Chih-Hwa, Weng, Pei-Wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36636031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221142242
_version_ 1784867597674610688
author Wang, Yu-Chun
Chen, Hung-Chou
Wong, Chin-Chean
Chang, Wen-Pei
Lin, Chun-Hao
Liaw, Chen-Kun
Chen, Chih-Hwa
Weng, Pei-Wei
author_facet Wang, Yu-Chun
Chen, Hung-Chou
Wong, Chin-Chean
Chang, Wen-Pei
Lin, Chun-Hao
Liaw, Chen-Kun
Chen, Chih-Hwa
Weng, Pei-Wei
author_sort Wang, Yu-Chun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Single-row (SR) and double-row repair techniques have been described to treat rotator cuff tears. We present a novel surgical strategy of arthroscopic-assisted mini-open repair in which a locking-loop suture bridge (LLSB) is used. PURPOSE: To compare the functional outcomes and repair integrity of LLSB technique to the SR technique for arthroscopic-assisted mini-open repair of small to medium rotator cuff tears. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Included were 39 patients who underwent LLSB repair (LLSB group) and 44 patients who underwent SR suture anchor repair (SR group) from 2015 to 2018. We evaluated all patients preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. Also, shoulder sonography was performed at 12 months postoperatively to evaluate repair integrity using the Sugaya classification system. The independent-sample t test was used to analyze functional outcomes (VAS, OSS, and ASES scores), and the Fisher exact test was used to analyze postoperative sonography results. RESULTS: Patients in both the LLSB and SR groups saw a significant improvement on all 3 outcome measures from preoperatively to 24 months postoperatively (P < .001 for all). However, when comparing scores between groups, only the scores at 3 months postoperatively differed significantly (VAS: P = .002; OSS: P < .001; ASES: P = .005). Shoulder sonography at 12 months postoperatively revealed no significant difference in repair integrity between the LLSB and SR groups (retear rate: 10.26% and 6.82%, respectively; P = .892). CONCLUSION: Better outcome scores were seen at 3-month follow-up in the LLSB group, with no difference in retear rates compared with the SR group at 12 months postoperatively. The LLSB technique was found to be a reliable technique for rotator cuff repair of small- to medium-sized tears.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9830097
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98300972023-01-11 Comparison of Locking-Loop Suture Bridge Repair and Single-Row Suture Anchor Repair in Small to Medium Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective Cohort Study With Clinical and Ultrasound Evaluations Wang, Yu-Chun Chen, Hung-Chou Wong, Chin-Chean Chang, Wen-Pei Lin, Chun-Hao Liaw, Chen-Kun Chen, Chih-Hwa Weng, Pei-Wei Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Single-row (SR) and double-row repair techniques have been described to treat rotator cuff tears. We present a novel surgical strategy of arthroscopic-assisted mini-open repair in which a locking-loop suture bridge (LLSB) is used. PURPOSE: To compare the functional outcomes and repair integrity of LLSB technique to the SR technique for arthroscopic-assisted mini-open repair of small to medium rotator cuff tears. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Included were 39 patients who underwent LLSB repair (LLSB group) and 44 patients who underwent SR suture anchor repair (SR group) from 2015 to 2018. We evaluated all patients preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. Also, shoulder sonography was performed at 12 months postoperatively to evaluate repair integrity using the Sugaya classification system. The independent-sample t test was used to analyze functional outcomes (VAS, OSS, and ASES scores), and the Fisher exact test was used to analyze postoperative sonography results. RESULTS: Patients in both the LLSB and SR groups saw a significant improvement on all 3 outcome measures from preoperatively to 24 months postoperatively (P < .001 for all). However, when comparing scores between groups, only the scores at 3 months postoperatively differed significantly (VAS: P = .002; OSS: P < .001; ASES: P = .005). Shoulder sonography at 12 months postoperatively revealed no significant difference in repair integrity between the LLSB and SR groups (retear rate: 10.26% and 6.82%, respectively; P = .892). CONCLUSION: Better outcome scores were seen at 3-month follow-up in the LLSB group, with no difference in retear rates compared with the SR group at 12 months postoperatively. The LLSB technique was found to be a reliable technique for rotator cuff repair of small- to medium-sized tears. SAGE Publications 2023-01-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9830097/ /pubmed/36636031 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221142242 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Wang, Yu-Chun
Chen, Hung-Chou
Wong, Chin-Chean
Chang, Wen-Pei
Lin, Chun-Hao
Liaw, Chen-Kun
Chen, Chih-Hwa
Weng, Pei-Wei
Comparison of Locking-Loop Suture Bridge Repair and Single-Row Suture Anchor Repair in Small to Medium Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective Cohort Study With Clinical and Ultrasound Evaluations
title Comparison of Locking-Loop Suture Bridge Repair and Single-Row Suture Anchor Repair in Small to Medium Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective Cohort Study With Clinical and Ultrasound Evaluations
title_full Comparison of Locking-Loop Suture Bridge Repair and Single-Row Suture Anchor Repair in Small to Medium Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective Cohort Study With Clinical and Ultrasound Evaluations
title_fullStr Comparison of Locking-Loop Suture Bridge Repair and Single-Row Suture Anchor Repair in Small to Medium Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective Cohort Study With Clinical and Ultrasound Evaluations
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Locking-Loop Suture Bridge Repair and Single-Row Suture Anchor Repair in Small to Medium Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective Cohort Study With Clinical and Ultrasound Evaluations
title_short Comparison of Locking-Loop Suture Bridge Repair and Single-Row Suture Anchor Repair in Small to Medium Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective Cohort Study With Clinical and Ultrasound Evaluations
title_sort comparison of locking-loop suture bridge repair and single-row suture anchor repair in small to medium rotator cuff tears: a prospective cohort study with clinical and ultrasound evaluations
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36636031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221142242
work_keys_str_mv AT wangyuchun comparisonoflockingloopsuturebridgerepairandsinglerowsutureanchorrepairinsmalltomediumrotatorcufftearsaprospectivecohortstudywithclinicalandultrasoundevaluations
AT chenhungchou comparisonoflockingloopsuturebridgerepairandsinglerowsutureanchorrepairinsmalltomediumrotatorcufftearsaprospectivecohortstudywithclinicalandultrasoundevaluations
AT wongchinchean comparisonoflockingloopsuturebridgerepairandsinglerowsutureanchorrepairinsmalltomediumrotatorcufftearsaprospectivecohortstudywithclinicalandultrasoundevaluations
AT changwenpei comparisonoflockingloopsuturebridgerepairandsinglerowsutureanchorrepairinsmalltomediumrotatorcufftearsaprospectivecohortstudywithclinicalandultrasoundevaluations
AT linchunhao comparisonoflockingloopsuturebridgerepairandsinglerowsutureanchorrepairinsmalltomediumrotatorcufftearsaprospectivecohortstudywithclinicalandultrasoundevaluations
AT liawchenkun comparisonoflockingloopsuturebridgerepairandsinglerowsutureanchorrepairinsmalltomediumrotatorcufftearsaprospectivecohortstudywithclinicalandultrasoundevaluations
AT chenchihhwa comparisonoflockingloopsuturebridgerepairandsinglerowsutureanchorrepairinsmalltomediumrotatorcufftearsaprospectivecohortstudywithclinicalandultrasoundevaluations
AT wengpeiwei comparisonoflockingloopsuturebridgerepairandsinglerowsutureanchorrepairinsmalltomediumrotatorcufftearsaprospectivecohortstudywithclinicalandultrasoundevaluations