Clinical and Functional Outcomes of Using Double-Row Transosseous Fixation Material in Advanced Age Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears

Mehmet Cenk Turgut; Serdar Toy; Mehmet Köse; Muhammed Çağatay Engin

doi:10.47482/acmr.2021.25

EN

Clinical and Functional Outcomes of Using Double-Row Transosseous Fixation Material in Advanced Age Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears

Abstract

Background: Rotator cuff tears are the most common cause of shoulder pain in the elderly. Various techniques have been used in the treatment of rotator cuff tears. This study discusses the clinical and functional outcomes in patients in whom rotator cuff tears have been repaired using double-row transosseous fixation material. Methods: The study is carried out on 37 elderly patients who underwent mini-open arthroscopy-supported transosseous repair between February 2017 - March 2019. Age and gender of the patients as well as the tear development mechanism, tear grade, fatty degeneration grade, acromion type, and the University of California - Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder Scale and Constant-Murley functional and clinical scores (CMS) before and six months after the surgery were recorded. Results: Mean patient age was 61.19±6.74 (range: 52-76). 17 (45.9%) were female, and 20 (54.1%) were male. The mean preoperative CMS score was 37.68±8.64, and the mean UCLA score was 14.19±8.64. Mean postoperative CMS and UCLA scores were 76.84±9.57 and 28.14±3.02, respectively. Preoperative and postoperative CMS and UCLA scores were statistically significantly different (p<0.001). Conclusions: Arthroscopy-aided transosseous method using Sharc-FT instrument both prevents open surgery complications and results in lower infection rates and less muscular power loss. Considering both its functional and clinical outcomes, Sharc-FT is a utilizable instrument.

Keywords

Rotator Cuff Rupture , Advanced Age , Mini-Open , Transosseous Fixation , Arthroscopy.

Kaynakça

1. Bunker T. Rotator cuff disease. Curr Orthopaed. 2002;16(3):223-33.
2. McKee MD, Yoo DJ. The effect of surgery for rotator cuff disease on general health status. Results of a prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82-A(7):970-9.
3. Cole BJ, McCarty LP, Kong RW, Alford W, Lewis PB, Hayden JK. Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: Prospective functional outcome and repair integrity at minimum 2-year follow-up. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2007;16(5):579-85.
4. Yamaguchi K, Levine WN, Marra G, Galatz LM, Klepps S, Flatow EL. Transitioning to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: the pros and cons. Instr Course Lect. 2003;52(1):81-92.
5. Codman E. Rupture of the supraspinatus tendon and other lesions in or about the subacromial bursa. The shoulder. 1934.
6. Mascarenhas R, Chalmers PN, Sayegh ET, Bhandari M, Verma NN, Cole BJ, et al. Is double-row rotator cuff repair clinically superior to single-row rotator cuff repair: a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses. Arthroscopy. 2014;30(9):1156-65.
7. Xu C, Zhao J, Li D. Meta-analysis comparing single-row and doublerow repair techniques in the arthroscopic treatment of rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(2):182-8.
8. Kuroda S, Ishige N, Mikasa M. Reply to the letter to the editor: advantages of arthroscopic transosseous suture repair of the rotator cuff without the use of anchors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(3):1044-5.
9. Kilcoyne KG, Guillaume SG, Hannan CV, Langdale ER, Belkoff SM, Srikumaran U. Anchored transosseous-equivalent versus anchorless transosseous rotator cuff repair: a biomechanical analysis in a cadaveric model. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(10):2364-71.
10. Goutallier D, Postel J-M, Radier C, Bernageau J, Zilber S. Long-term functional and structural outcome in patients with intact repairs 1 year after open transosseous rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18(4):521-8.

11. Kim K-C, Rhee K-J, Shin H-D, Kim Y-M. Arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair. Orthopedics. 2008;31(4):327-30.
12. Baudi P, Dani ER, Campochiaro G, Rebuzzi M, Serafini F, Catani F. The rotator cuff tear repair with a new arthroscopic transosseous system: the Sharc-FT®. Musculoskelet Surg. 2013;97(1):57-61.
13. Apreleva M, Özbaydar M, Fitzgibbons PG, Warner JJ. Rotator cuff tears: the effect of the reconstruction method on three-dimensional repair site area. Arthroscopy. 2002;18(5):519-26.
14. Goldberg B. Minimally invasive shoulder and elbow surgery. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(9):1679.
15. Severud EL, Ruotolo C, Abbott DD, Nottage WM. All-arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: a long-term retrospective outcome comparison. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(3):234-8.
16. Weber S. All-arthroscopic versus mini-open repair in the management of tears of the rotator cuff: A prospective evaluation. Arthroscopy. 2001;17(suppl 1).
17. Kim S-H, Ha K-I, Park J-H, Kang J-S, Oh S-K, Oh I. Arthroscopic versus mini-open salvage repair of the rotator cuff tear: outcome analysis at 2 to 6 years’ follow-up. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(7):746-54.
18. Herrera MF, Bauer G, Reynolds F, Wilk RM, Bigliani LU, Levine WN. Infection after mini-open rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(6):605-8.
19. Mirzayan R, Itamura JM, Vangsness Jr T, Holtom PD, Sherman R, Patzakis MJ. Management of chronic deep infection following rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82(8):1115.
20. Roßbach BP, Jansson V, Pietschmann M, Müller P. Endoskopische Schultereingriffe: sicher und effizient. Orthopädie und Rheuma. 2014;17(5):28-36.
21. Weber SC, Abrams JS, Nottage WM. Complications associated with arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Arthroscopy. 2002;18(2):88-95.
22. Zhang Z, Gu B, Zhu W, Zhu L, Li Q. Arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: a prospective, randomized study with 24-month follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2014;24(6):845-50.
23. Kim S-J, Kim S-H, Moon H-S, Chun Y-M. Footprint contact area and interface pressure comparison between the knotless and knot-tying transosseous-equivalent technique for rotator cuff repair. Arthroscopy. 2016;32(1):7-12.
24. Fealy S, Kingham TP, Altchek DW. Mini-open rotator cuff repair using a two-row fixation technique: outcomes analysis in patients with small, moderate, and large rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy. 2002;18(6):665-70.
25. Park MC, ElAttrache NS, Tibone JE, Ahmad CS, Jun B-J, Lee TQ. Part I: Footprint contact characteristics for a transosseous-equivalent rotator cuff repair technique compared with a double-row repair technique. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(4):461-8.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Klinik Tıp Bilimleri

Bölüm

Klinik Araştırma

Yazarlar

Mehmet Cenk Turgut
0000-0002-8642-6824
Türkiye

Serdar Toy ^*
Türkiye

Mehmet Köse Bu kişi benim
0000-0001-9948-3855
Türkiye

Muhammed Çağatay Engin
0000-0002-9302-9587
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi

5 Mayıs 2021

Gönderilme Tarihi

4 Ocak 2021

Kabul Tarihi

16 Nisan 2021

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2021 Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.47482/acmr.2021.25

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA76PK36TN

APA

Turgut, M. C., Toy, S., Köse, M., & Engin, M. Ç. (2021). Clinical and Functional Outcomes of Using Double-Row Transosseous Fixation Material in Advanced Age Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears. Archives of Current Medical Research, 2(2), 121-127. https://doi.org/10.47482/acmr.2021.25

Archives of Current Medical Research (ACMR), araştırmaları ücretsiz sunmanın daha büyük bir küresel bilgi alışverişini desteklediğini göz önünde bulundurarak, tüm içeriğe anında açık erişim sağlar. Kamunun erişimine açık olması, daha büyük bir küresel bilgi alışverişini destekler.

http://www.acmronline.org/

Clinical and Functional Outcomes of Using Double-Row Transosseous Fixation Material in Advanced Age Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears

Abstract

Keywords

Öz

Kaynakça

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Konular

Bölüm

Yazarlar

Yayımlanma Tarihi

Gönderilme Tarihi

Kabul Tarihi

Yayımlandığı Sayı

DOI

IZ

Kaynak Göster