Patient-determined outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without biceps tenodesis utilizing the PITT technique.

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND: The percutaneous intra-articular transtendon technique (PITT) is a simple, rapid, and low-cost method of performing a biceps tenodesis. Few studies exist that examine the patient-determined outcomes of this technique in general or in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) with and without biceps tenodesis. We hypothesized that patients undergoing an isolated arthroscopic RCR would have equivalent outcomes to those undergoing RCRs with PITT biceps tenodesis. METHODS: We compared preoperative, patient-determined outcomes scores on patients undergoing primary arthroscopic RCR with and without a PITT biceps tenodesis with postoperative scores at a minimum of 2 years. These scores included the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff score (WORC), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Shoulder Activity Level (SAL). Indication for a concomitant biceps tenodesis was a partial long head biceps tendon tear or biceps instability/subluxation. RESULTS: A total of 153 patients underwent an isolated RCR and 131 patients underwent RCR with biceps tenodesis (RCRBT). Both groups had improvements in WORC, ASES, SANE, and SST (P < .0001) and deteriorations in the SAL (P ≤ .005). There was no difference in the change in outcome scores between the groups (RCRBT vs. RCR, respectively) for WORC (46 vs. 47; P = .85), ASES (46 vs. 47; P = .82), SANE (53 vs. 51; P = .35), SST (5.8 vs. 5.8; P = .93), and SAL (-0.9 vs. -1.4; P = .46). There was no difference between the groups in complications that required revision surgery (1.5% vs. 1.3%; P = .91). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic PITT RCRBT is safe and effective with equivalent patient-determined outcomes compared with patients undergoing RCR without biceps tenodesis.

Does arthroscopic rotator cuff repair improve patients' activity levels?

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff repair decreases pain, improves range of motion, and increases strength. Whether these improvements translate to an improvement in a patient's activity level postoperatively remains unknown. The Shoulder Activity Level is a valid and reliable outcomes survey that can be used to measure a patient's shoulder-specific activity level. Currently, there are no studies that examine the effect of rotator cuff repair on shoulder activity level. METHODS: Preoperative patient-determined outcomes scores collected prospectively on patients undergoing rotator cuff repair were compared with postoperative scores at a minimum of 2 years. These scores included the Shoulder Activity Level, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and simple shoulder test. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. RESULTS: Included were 281 shoulders from 273 patients with a mean follow-up of 3.7 years. The postoperative median Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (42 vs. 94), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (41 vs. 95), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (30 vs. 95), and simple shoulder test (4 vs. 11) scores were statistically significantly improved compared with preoperative scores (P < .0001). The postoperative median Shoulder Activity Level score decreased compared with the preoperative score (12 vs. 11; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients reported a statistically significant deterioration of their Shoulder Activity Level score after rotator cuff repair compared with their preoperative scores, although disease-specific and joint-specific quality of life scores all had statistically significantly improvement. This study suggests that patients generally have (1) significant improvements in their quality of life and (2) small deteriorations in activity level after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Does total shoulder arthroplasty improve patients' activity levels?

BACKGROUND: Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) decreases pain, improves range of motion, and increases strength. Whether these improvements translate to improvements in activity levels postoperatively remains unknown. The Shoulder Activity Level (SAL) is a valid and reliable outcomes survey that measures the patient's activity level. Currently, no studies have specifically examined the effect of TSA on SAL. METHODS: A prospective collection of preoperative, patient-determined outcomes on patients undergoing TSA was compared with postoperative scores at a minimum of 2 years. These scores included the SAL, Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST). Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing primary anatomic TSA or reverse TSA. RESULTS: A mean follow-up of 3.7 years was available for 80 anatomic and 42 reverse TSAs. Anatomic TSAs had improvements from median preoperative scores to median postoperative scores for WOOS (34 to 89; P < .0001), ASES (30 to 87; P < .0001), SST (2 to 9; P < .0001), and SANE scores (23 to 90; P < .0001). The SAL improved from 7 to 8 but did not quite reach statistical significance (P = .07). Reverse TSAs had improvements from median preoperative scores to median postoperative scores for WOOS (31 to 83; P < .0001), ASES (29 to 82; P < .0001), SST (2 to 7; P < .0001), and SANE scores (20 to 85; P < .0001). The SAL improved from 4.5 to 6, but this did not reach statistical significance (P = .38). However, when anatomic and reverse TSAs were analyzed together, a statistically significant improvement was found postoperatively in the SAL (from 6 to 8; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic TSA and reverse TSA improved activity levels. In addition, disease-specific and joint-specific quality of life scores all had statistically significant improvements. This study suggests that after shoulder arthroplasty patients in general have (1) significant improvements in their quality of life and (2) have small improvements in activity level. This study shows that most patients do not have to decrease their activity levels to diminish symptoms to an acceptable range.