Comparison of cost, surgical time, and clinical results between arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair with lateral cortical augmentation and arthroscopic transosseous equivalent suture bridge: A propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the healthcare burden, the clinical results of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and the cost of the implants used have recently been focused upon. This study compared implant cost, surgical time, short-term clinical results, and cuff repair integrity 2 years postoperatively between arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair using lateral cortical augmentation (TOA) and arthroscopic transosseous-equivalent suture bridge (TOE). METHODS: This study included 220 patients with rotator cuff repairs performed by a single surgeon between December 2013 and December 2018. Overall, 70 TOA and 68 TOE cases met the inclusion criteria. The same surgeon performed the procedures at two different hospitals, and the techniques differed between the facilities. A total of 42 TOA patients were matched with 42 TOE patients. The patients were matched using a propensity score analysis by gender, age, and cuff tear size. The minimum follow-up period was 2 years. Implant cost and surgical time were compared between the two methods. The range of motion, clinical outcomes, and visual analog scale were evaluated. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed to examine cuff repair integrity 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: The follow-up rate was 81% (112/138 patients). Implant cost was significantly lower with TOA ($1,396 vs. $2,165; p < 0.001) than with TOE. The average surgical time in the TOA method was significantly shorter than that in the TOE method (82 vs. 109 min; p = 0.001). At a minimum 2-year follow-up, the mean active elevation, abduction, and clinical outcomes improved with both methods, although no improvements in external and internal rotations were observed with either method. There were no significant differences in the postoperative variables and retear rate (TOA, 12%; TOE, 19%; p = 0.548) between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: TOA and TOE achieved comparable clinical results; however, TOA was more cost-effective and had a shorter surgical time than TOE. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level Ⅲ, retrospective matched control study.

Assessment of Prevalence and Risk Factors for Central Sensitization Related to Shoulder Osteoarthritis and Rotator Cuff Tears Using the Central Sensitization Inventory: A Cross-Sectional Study in Shoulder Surgery Patients.

Shoulder disorders occasionally cause intractable pain. Central sensitization (CS) may be involved in such pain. Identifying risk factors associated with CS is crucial for effective pain control. This study aimed to determine the effects of shoulder osteoarthritis and rotator cuff tears (RCT) on CS and associated factors. This study included patients evaluated for CS using the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) before surgery for shoulder osteoarthritis, RCT, or cuff tear arthropathy. Patients with a CSI score of 40 or higher were defined as having CS. The relationships between glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA), RCT size, and CS were statistically analyzed. Multiple regression analysis was performed to examine the factors affecting CSI scores. Subjects included 167 patients: 131 patients had RCT without GHOA, 23 had GHOA with RCT, and 13 had GHOA without RCT. The GHOA group had a significantly higher CSI score (27.5 [10.8-40.5] vs. 18.0 [10.0-27.5]) and CS prevalence (27.8% vs. 8.4%) than the RCT without GHOA group. There was no significant correlation between RCT size and CSI scores. Multiple regression analysis showed that female sex, severe pain, and long pain duration were associated with higher CSI scores. Considering the risk factors for CS might be helpful in shoulder treatment.