Bone channeling in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of level I studies.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is ongoing controversy regarding the effect of bone channeling in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Since the most recent systematic reviews in 2019, several large high-level trials have been completed. This study assessed all available level I randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without bone marrow channeling. METHODS: A systematic search of the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted through mid January 2023. Two reviewers performed screening of studies meeting the eligibility criteria English-language RCTs in patients aged ≥18 years comparing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair of full-thickness tears with and without bone marrow channeling (channeling group and control group, respectively). Functional scores, pain, healing rates, and reoperations were reviewed using pooled analysis where appropriate. The methodologic quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: A total of 6 randomized studies (N = 593) met the inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis of all 6 studies showed no significant mean difference in function (1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.63 to 3.26), as measured by the Constant-Murley score. Retear rates were also not statistically different between groups (risk ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.71), with pooled retear rates of 19.6% (48 of 245) with channeling and 19.8% (51 of 257) without. The other outcomes of interest were only available for analysis in a subset of studies. There were no standardized mean differences in pain (0.09; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.36), and there were similar reoperation rates (risk ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.43 to 3.34) in the channeling and control groups. For the included studies, the overall quality of evidence by outcome was judged to be moderate (function, pain, and reoperations) or low (retear rates), mainly owing to risk of bias (all outcomes) and inconsistency (retear rates). CONCLUSION: The results of this study refute the findings of prior systematic reviews that showed that channeling reduces the retear rate when combined with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. This meta-analysis of level I evidence, including recent larger RCTs, demonstrates that bone marrow stimulation in the setting of primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has no significant effect on functional outcomes, healing, pain, or reoperation rates.