Rotator cuff repair in patients 50 years of age or younger: A comparative study of functional outcomes in relation to older patients.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the clinical results of surgical treatment of rotator cuff tears in young patients and most of the publications are only case series and with a small number of evaluated individuals. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair according to age at the time of the procedure. HYPOTHESIS: Patients with 50 years of age or younger undergoing surgical treatment of rotator cuff tear have similar clinical outcomes to older patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study comparing results obtained after surgical treatment of rotator cuff tears between patients aged 50 years or younger and the older patients by the ASES and UCLA functional scales. Patients undergoing arthroscopy full-thickness rotator cuff repair were included. RESULTS: We evaluated 390 shoulders (377 patients), 94 aged 50 years or younger (median=46.5 years) and 296 aged over 50 years (median=60 years). Both groups significantly improved with the procedure after 24 months of follow-up, according to the ASES and UCLA scales (p<0.001). The groups did not differ in the scores obtained in the preoperative assessments and at 24 months of follow-up. The score obtained on the ASES scale at 24 months of follow-up had a median of 87.2 (IQR=38) among patients aged 50 years or younger and 90 points (IQR=26.4) among older patients (p=0.253). The scores obtained by the UCLA scale were 31 points (IQR=9) and 33 points (IQR =7) respectively (p=0.156). DISCUSSION: Our results showed that, after 24 months, the functional results of arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair did not differ between patients younger than 50 years and older patients. These results are similar to those found by other authors. Both groups of patients achieved significant improvement after the surgical procedure, achieving approximately 90 points on the ASES scale and 32 points on the UCLA scale. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III Retrospective cohort study.