Leukocyte-Poor Platelet-Rich Plasma as an Adjuvant to Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Reduces the Retear Rate But Does Not Improve Functional Outcomes: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Whether the use of PRP as an adjuvant of rotator cuff repairs leads to improved tendon healing and better functional outcomes remains unclear in clinical evidence. PURPOSE: The main purpose of this study was to assess whether the use of leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) as an adjuvant to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) decreases the rate of retears compared with a control group. The secondary objective was to analyze whether LP-PRP improves patient-reported outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: This was a double-blind randomized controlled trial at a single center. A consecutive series of 96 patients with rotator cuff tears <3 cm were enrolled and randomly allocated to the control group (double-row suture-bridge ARCR alone [n = 48]) and the PRP group (double-row suture-bridge repair, followed by 1 LP-PRP injection during surgery [n = 48]). The visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were administered preoperatively and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed to evaluate tendon integrity at 6-month follow-up. Both patients and assessors were blinded to the intervention received during surgery. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 56.1 ± 2.98 years. Of the 96 patients, 90 had MRI performed at 6 months after surgery (94% radiological follow-up). The retear rate in the PRP group was 15.2% (7/46 [95% CI, 6%-28%]), which was lower than that in the control group of 34.1% (15/44 [95% CI, 20%-49%]) (P = .037). Therefore, the risk ratio of ruptures in patients exposed to LP-PRP was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.2-0.9; P = .037). Overall, the ASES, VAS, SANE, and PSQI scores showed a statistical improvement after surgery (P < .001). There were no significant differences in functional scores between the groups. Most of the patients exceeded the minimal clinically important difference for the ASES, SANE, and VAS without significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with rotator cuff tears <3 cm undergoing double-row suture-bridge repair, a 5-mL dose of LP-PRP injected at the tendon-bone interface significantly reduced the retear rate. However, the use of LP-PRP in terms of postoperative pain and patient-reported outcomes failed to show clinically meaningful effects. REGISTRATION: NCT04703998 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Benefits of Patch Augmentation on Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background: Despite technological advances, the overall retear rate on rotator cuff repair is still high. Patches have shown significant reduction in retear rate and pain scores; however, this is not a universal finding and conflicting results have been shown among functional shoulder scales. Purpose: To analyze previous controlled trials of the literature to bring a consensus about the effectiveness of patch use on rotator cuff repair. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: The search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane in April 2020. The results of rotator cuff repair with patch augmentation versus without augmentation (control) were compared through odds ratio (OR), raw mean difference (RMD), and standardized mean difference (SMD) of retear rate; functional shoulder scales; strength; and range of motion (ROM). Results: Of 733 initial studies, 7 of them met the criteria to be included in the analysis. Compared with the control group, the patch augmentation group had a significantly lower retear rate (OR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.55]; P < .001), lower pain (SMD, -0.42 [-0.71 to -0.12]; P < .01), a higher University of California Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale (RMD, 0.87 [0.15 to 1.60], P = .017), and a trend toward higher strength (SMD, 0.95 [-0.03 to 1.94], P = .05) and lower forward elevation ROM (RMD, -10.50 [-21.86 to 0.67]; P = .06), while no changes were noted for other functional scales or for internal and external rotation ROM. Conclusion: The results point to benefits of patch augmentation in rotator cuff repair, particularly a reduction in retear rate. More interventional studies with better methodological quality should be conducted to confirm the results of this initial review.

Retears of the Rotator Cuff: An Ultrasonographic Assessment During the First Postoperative Year.

BACKGROUND: Surgical repair of rotator cuff (RC) tears is an effective treatment option. However, the prevalence of recurrent ruptures is high. HYPOTHESIS: Recurrent tears are a frequent complication of surgical repair of RC tears. Their incidence might be influenced by factors such as the patient's age and size of the initial tear. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Data from 90 adult patients who underwent arthroscopic RC repair between 2014 and 2017 and underwent an ultrasound examination 6 to 12 months after surgery were analyzed retrospectively. Massive tears were repaired using a double-row technique, and nonmassive tears were repaired with a single-row technique. Clinical records were reviewed for demographic information. RESULTS: All patients (57.8% women; 42.2% men) were older than 18 years (mean, 58.9 years). Of these patients, 30.0% (27/90) had massive tears, which were primarily found in patients ≥60 years (74.1%; 20/27). Complete healing was seen in 74.5% of all repairs during follow-up. A total of 23 patients (25.5%) had retears (13 complete; 10 partial), which were diagnosed by ultrasound imaging 6 to 12 months after the initial surgery. The occurrence of retears was more prevalent in patients with massive tears than in patients with nonmassive tears (40.7% vs 19.0%, respectively); the difference was statistically significant (P = .03). Reruptures occurred in 50.0% of patients older than 60 years with massive tears. Although patients older than 60 years had more recurrent tears (32.6%) compared with younger patients (18.2%), the difference was not statistically significant (P = .12). CONCLUSION: One-quarter of the patients who had undergone surgical repair of an RC tear had recurrent ruptures. There was a statistically significant association between the initial massive tear and a retear. Patients older than 60 years showed a higher recurrence rate, but this difference lacked statistical significance. Reruptures occurred in 50.0% of patients older than 60 years with massive tears.