Cuff integrity after arthroscopic versus open rotator cuff repair: A prospective study

Julie Bishop, Steven Klepps, Ian K. Lo, Justin Bird, James N. Gladstone, Evan L. Flatow

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

474 Scopus citations

Abstract

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) has been reported to have good clinical results but high retear rates by ultrasound. We prospectively assessed postoperative cuff integrity and outcome after arthroscopic RCR (40 patients) and compared these results with open RCR (32 patients). Evaluation preoperatively and at 1 year included a physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Constant scores improved significantly in both groups (P < .0001). Overall, 69% of repairs in the open group and 53% in the arthroscopic group were intact by magnetic resonance imaging. Of tears less than 3 cm in size, 74% in the open group and 84% in the arthroscopic group were intact. Of tears greater than 3 cm in size, 62% in the open group and 24% in the arthroscopic group were intact (P < .036). In the arthroscopic group, patients with an intact cuff had significantly greater strength of elevation (P = .01) and external rotation (P = .02). We conclude that open and arthroscopic RCRs have similar clinical outcomes. Cuff integrity is comparable for small tears, but large tears have twice the retear rate after arthroscopic repair.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)290-299
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Volume15
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2006
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cuff integrity after arthroscopic versus open rotator cuff repair: A prospective study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this