2025 ISAKOS Congress in Munich, Germany

2025 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster


A Comparison of Healing Rate After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Between Sling and Abduction Pillow Sling Immobilization: Non-Inferiority Randomized Controlled Trial

Chayatorn Karoonvatana, MD THAILAND
Siriraj hospital, Bangkok, Bangkok, THAILAND

FDA Status Cleared

Summary

Arm sling use is not inferior to an abduction pillow sling in terms of structural healing at 48 weeks

ePosters will be available shortly before Congress

Abstract

Background

Rotator cuff tears are increasingly common, affecting 1 in 5 people experiencing shoulder pain. Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair is considered the standard treatment for patients who require surgery or have not responded to conservative treatment. However, there is currently a lack of clear guidelines regarding the choice of immobilization device after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The comparative outcomes of using an abduction pillow sling versus an arm sling in terms of structural healing and clinical results remain unknown.
Objectives: This study aims to compare healing rates after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using arm sling versus abduction pillow sling for immobilization.

Materials And Methods

80 eligible patients diagnosed with a confirmed rotator cuff tear, who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either an abduction pillow sling or an arm sling. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging was performed at 48 weeks to evaluate the healing rate of the rotator cuff. Follow-up examinations, including ASES score, visual analog scale, and glenohumeral range of motion, were scheduled at 2, 6, 10, 18, 24, and 48 weeks.

Results

In a study of 80 patients diagnosed with rotator cuff tears who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, 4 were excluded from the research due to loss to follow-up . No significant difference was found in healing rates between the two groups at 48 weeks. Both groups showed significant improvements in ASES score, pain, and range of motion. The sling group had better outcomes in pain and range of motion during early rehabilitation period (10 weeks) but no significant differences in short-term (2 and 6 weeks) or long-term (18, 24, and 48 weeks) follow-ups.

Conclusion

Arm sling use is not inferior to abduction pillow sling in terms of structural healing (MRI at 48 weeks). Moreover, during early rehabilitation, the sling group demonstrated better outcomes in pain and range of motion. These findings support the use of an arm sling as an alternative immobilization device after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.