Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Patient-determined outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without biceps tenodesis utilizing the PITT technique.
Baumgarten, Keith M; Chang, Peter S; Foley, Elaine K.
Afiliação
  • Baumgarten KM; Orthopedic Institute, Sioux Falls, SD, USA; University of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Vermillion, SD, USA. Electronic address: Kbaumga@yahoo.com.
  • Chang PS; University of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Vermillion, SD, USA.
  • Foley EK; Orthopedic Institute, Sioux Falls, SD, USA.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg ; 28(6): 1049-1055, 2019 Jun.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30981549
ABSTRACT
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.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Artroscopia / Tenodese / Tendões dos Músculos Isquiotibiais / Lesões do Manguito Rotador Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Assunto da revista: ORTOPEDIA Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Artroscopia / Tenodese / Tendões dos Músculos Isquiotibiais / Lesões do Manguito Rotador Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Assunto da revista: ORTOPEDIA Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article