Combination of Superior and Posterior Capsular Release Versus Superior Capsular Release Alone in Arthroscopic Repair of Large-to-Massive Rotator Cuff Tears.

Background: Superior capsular release has been used to reduce tendon tension, especially in arthroscopic repair of large-to-massive rotator cuff tears. Some clinicians have used a more extensive release of capsules in arthroscopic cuff repair for adequate reduction of torn tendons to footprints. Purpose: To explore the effects of additional posterior capsular release for superior capsular release in arthroscopic repair of large-to-massive rotator cuff tears. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We compared 26 shoulders that underwent superior and posterior capsular release (group S&P) with 26 shoulders that underwent superior capsular release alone (group S) in arthroscopic repair of large-to-massive rotator cuff tears between January 23, 2013 and December 2, 2015. The visual analog scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Constant score, and range of motion (ROM) and muscle power were checked preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Follow-up ultrasound was checked at 2 years postoperatively. Results: In both groups, the overall mean functional outcomes improved from preoperatively to postoperatively. Patients in group S&P showed more pre- to postoperative improvement than patients in group S with regard to internal rotation ROM (mean difference, 30.0° vs 20.6°; P < .001) and internal rotation power (3.4 vs 1.8 kgf; P = .001). Patients in group S had a higher retear rate on the follow-up ultrasound than patients in group S&P, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (23.1% vs 11.5%, respectively; P = .465). Conclusion: In the current study, patients who underwent superior and posterior capsular release in arthroscopic repair of large-to-massive rotator cuff tears had greater postoperative improvement in internal rotation ROM and power compared with patients who underwent superior capsular release alone.

The development of a quantitative scoring system to predict whether a large-to-massive rotator cuff tear can be arthroscopically repaired.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to develop a quantitative scoring system to predict whether a large-to-massive rotator cuff tear was arthroscopically reparable prior to surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the pre-operative MR imaging and surgical records of 87 patients (87 shoulders) who underwent arthroscopic repair of a large-to-massive rotator cuff tear. Patients were divided into two groups, based on the surgical outcome of the repair. Of the 87 patients, 53 underwent complete repair (Group I) and 34 an incomplete repair (Group II). Pre-operative MR images were reviewed to quantify several variables. Between-group differences were evaluated and multiple logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the predictive value of significant variables. The reparability index (RI) was constructed using the odds ratios of significant variables and a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis performed to identify the optimal RI cutoff to differentiate between the two groups. RESULTS: The following variables were identified as independent predictors of arthroscopic reparability: the size of the defect with medial-lateral diameter (cutoff, 4.2 cm) and anterior-posterior diameter (cutoff, 3.7cm); Patte's grade of muscle atrophy (cutoff, grade 3) and Goutallier grade of fatty degeneration (cutoff, grade 3). An RI cutoff value of 2.5 provided the highest differentiation between groups I and II, with an area under the curve of 0.964, and a sensitivity of 73.5% and specificity of 96.2%. CONCLUSION: The RI developed in our study may prove to be an efficient clinical scoring system to predict whether a large-to-massive rotator cuff tear is arthroscopically reparable. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1656-61.

Platelet-rich plasma for arthroscopic repair of large to massive rotator cuff tears: a randomized, single-blind, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is expected to have a biological augmentation potential in the healing of various diseases and injuries, including rotator cuff tears. However, few evaluations have been performed specifically for large to massive tears. PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of PRP augmentation in patients undergoing arthroscopic repair for large to massive rotator cuff tears. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 48 patients scheduled for arthroscopic repair of large to massive rotator cuff tears were randomly assigned to receive either PRP-augmented (PRP group) or conventional treatment (conventional group). In the PRP group, 3 PRP gels (3 × 3 mL) were applied to each patient between the torn end and the greater tuberosity. The primary outcome measure was the retear rate assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomographic arthrography (CTA) at a minimum of 9 months after surgery. Secondary outcome measures included pain, range of motion, muscle strength, overall satisfaction, functional scores, and the change in cross-sectional area (CSA) of the supraspinatus. RESULTS: The retear rate of the PRP group (20.0%) was significantly lower than that of the conventional group (55.6%) (P = .023). Clinical outcomes showed no statistical difference between the 2 groups (all P > .05) except for the overall function (P = .043). The change in 1-year postoperative and immediately postoperative CSA was significantly different between the 2 groups: -15.54 ± 94.34 mm² in the PRP group versus -85.62 ± 103.57 mm² in the conventional group (P = .047). CONCLUSION: The application of PRP for large to massive rotator cuff repairs significantly improved structural outcomes, as evidenced by a decreased retear rate and increased CSA of the supraspinatus compared with repairs without PRP augmentation. While there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes except the overall shoulder function after 1-year follow-up, better structural outcomes in the PRP group might suggest improved clinical outcomes at longer term follow-up.