2023 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster
Does Rotator Cuff Tear Morphology Affect Clinical Outcomes Post-Surgical Repair In Large To Massive Tears?
Mark H.X. Yeo, MBBS, Singapore, Singapore SINGAPORE
Shawn Js Seah, MBBS, Singapore, Singapore SINGAPORE
Merrill Lee, MBBS, MRCS(Edin), Singapore SINGAPORE
Denny T. T. Lie, MBBS, FRCS, FAMS, Singapore SINGAPORE
Singapore General Hospital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Singapore, Singapore, SINGAPORE
FDA Status Not Applicable
Summary
Using an updated classification system for rotator cuff tears, our study has shown that tear morphology does not affect post-operative clinical outcomes in large to massive tears.
ePosters will be available shortly before Congress
Abstract
Introduction
Rotator cuff tear morphology (RCTM) is an important predictor for rotator cuff outcomes and can influence the corresponding repair technique. While the literature on RCTM has been growing, there is still a paucity of evidence investigating its association with clinical outcomes, especially in large to massive tears.
Objectives
The primary aim of this current study was to evaluate the effects of RCTM on clinical outcomes in large to massive tears, using an updated classification system proposed in this study.
Methodology
Patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of large to massive, full thickness rotator cuff tears were retrospectively analysed. The tear pattern was classified at the time of surgery as Type IA, Type IB, Type IIA and Type IIB. Primary outcome measures were Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Constant Shoulder Score (CSS), University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Score (UCLASS) followed-up at 6, 12 and 24-months as well as retear rates at latest follow-up. Clinical outcome was compared across all 4 types (Type IA to Type IIB). Analysis of Variance and Student's t test were used to compare continuous, parametric data. Categorical variables were analysed via Pearson's chi-squared test.
Results
In total, 109 patients were included in the study with a mean age of 65.5±9.4. The prevalence of each tear morphologies from Type IA to IIB was 22.0%, 34.9%, 27.5% and 15.6% respectively. All four groups showed statistically significant improvement from pre-operative to post-operative scores in all 3 outcome measures at 24 months (p<0.001 for all). No significant difference in primary outcome measures or retear rates were detected between all 4 groups.
Conclusion
RCTM does not influence clinical outcomes post-arthroscopic rotator cuff repair at mid-term follow-up. This study proposes a robust and updated system to classify RCTM.