AAOS2017: In situ repair versus tear-completion repair for partial thickness RC tears

Study Type: Randomized Trial
OE Level of Evidence: N/A
Journal Level of Evidence: N/A
This ACE Report is a summary of a conference presentation or abstract. The information provided has limited the ability to provide an accurate assessment of the risk of bias or the overall quality. Please interpret the results with caution as trials may be in progress and select results may have been presented.
100 patients scheduled for arthroscopy repair of a partial-thickness rotator cuff tear were randomized to either in situ repair, or completion of the tear followed by repair. Patients were followed for a minimum of 12 months postoperatively for clinical scores for pain and function, as well as MRI to assess tendon integrity and retear rate. Results demonstrated no Please login to view the rest of this report. Please login to view the rest of this report.
Why was this study needed now?
Partial thickness rotator cuff tears are a common injury presenting with shoulder pain and disability. Partial tears can either be repaired in situ or the tear in the tendon can be completed as if in a full-thickness tear, then repaired. It is unknown whether outcomes differ between the two repair techniques.
What was the principal research question?
In the arthroscopic management of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears, is there any significant difference in clinical outcome between in situ repair and tear completion followed by repair when assessed after 6- and 12-month follow-ups?
Population: 100 patients with articular- and bursal-sided partial-thickness (>50%) rotator cuff tears. All cases were repaired using a suture-bridge technique.
Intervention: In situ repair: Arthroscopic repair of the tear was performed in situ. (n=50)
Comparison: Tear completion followed by repair: During arthroscopy, the remaining intact tendon was torn, followed by repair. (n=50)
Outcomes: Clinical outcome scores included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) Score, the Constant score, the Simple Shoulder Test, and a visual analog scale for pain. The range of motion was also measured. Postoperative MRI was performed to assess tendon integrity.
Methods: RCT
Time: Follow-up was scheduled for 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Mean follow-up was 19.1 months (12-42)
What were the important findings?
What should I remember most?
How will this affect the care of my patients?
The authors responsible for this critical appraisal and ACE Report indicate no potential conflicts of interest relating to the content in the original publication.
April 5, 2017
Interesting study