Revision rotator cuff repair versus primary repair: an assessment of longitudinal outcomes in revision rotator cuff repair.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Information about outcomes after revision rotator cuff repair (RCR) is limited. A more thorough investigation of pain, range of motion (ROM), strength, and functional outcomes is needed. Comparing outcomes between primary and revision rotator cuff repair patients can help surgeons guide patient expectations of the revision procedure. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of a revision repair group to a control group of primary RCR patients. We expect revision RCR patients to have worse clinical outcomes than primary RCR patients. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent primary or revision RCR between 2012 and 2020 was performed. The case group included 104 revision patients, and the control group included 414 primary RCR patients. Patient visual analog score for pain, ROM, strength, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Constant-Murley scores were collected at baseline, 12 months, 24 months, and final follow-up. RESULTS: The average final follow-up was 43.9 months for primary patients and 63.8 months for revision patients. Three hundred fifty-two primary patients and 55 revision patients had a final follow-up of 2 or more years. By the final follow-up, primary patients had less pain than revision patients (Δ of 2.11, P < .0001), but both groups improved overall. Primary patients had significant improvements in forward flexion, external rotation, internal rotation, and abduction at 2 years that were lost by final follow-up, but revision patients did not experience any long-term improvement in ROM. These differences in ROM between groups were not significant. Supraspinatus strength in the revision group did not improve nor decline by final follow-up. By final follow-up, both primary and revision patients had improved SST and ASES scores from baseline. Primary patient ASES scores were 17.9 points higher (P < .0001) than revision patients by final follow-up, and there was no difference between groups in SST scores at this time. CONCLUSION: Revision RCR significantly improves patient pain, SST score, and ASES score at 4 years. Revision patients should not expect to see the improvements in ROM that may occur after primary repair.