Search Filters

  • Presentation Format
  • Media Type
  • Diagnosis / Condition
  • Diagnosis Method
  • Patient Populations
  • Treatment / Technique

Evaluation Of Knotted Vs Knotless Medial Row Transosseous Equivalent Rotator Cuff Repair: A Retrospective Review

2021 Congress Paper Abstracts

Evaluation Of Knotted Vs Knotless Medial Row Transosseous Equivalent Rotator Cuff Repair: A Retrospective Review

Daniel Nemirov, BA, UNITED STATES Zachary J Herman, MD, UNITED STATES Ryan W. Paul, BS, UNITED STATES Ari Clements, BA, UNITED STATES Matthew Beucherie, BS, UNITED STATES Joseph Michael Brutico, BS, UNITED STATES Christopher J. Hadley, BS, UNITED STATES Michael G. Ciccotti, MD, UNITED STATES Kevin Freedman, MD, UNITED STATES Brandon Erickson, MD, UNITED STATES Sommer Hammoud, MD, UNITED STATES Meghan E. Bishop, MD, UNITED STATES

Rothman Institute, PHILADELPHIA, PA, UNITED STATES


2021 Congress   ePoster Presentation     Not yet rated

 

Anatomic Location

Diagnosis / Condition

Treatment / Technique

Patient Populations

Diagnosis Method

MRI

Sports Medicine

This media is available to ISAKOS 2021: Global Registrants and On Demand purchases only.
Please log in or purchase to access.


Summary: The purpose of this study is to retrospectively investigate the clinical findings and outcomes of patients who underwent knotted medial row rotator cuff repair compared to patients who underwent knotless medial row rotator cuff repair.


Introduction

Rotator cuff tears are a common cause of shoulder pain and discomfort. Arthroscopy has evolved into the preferred surgical technique for treatment of rotator cuff tears; however, controversy remains regarding the best anchor configuration and suture technique. Debate exists on whether or not to tie the medial row in a double row transosseous equivalent cuff repair. While biomechanical differences of these techniques have been determined, no clinical studies have shown an advantage of tying the medial row versus not tying the medial row for repair. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively investigate the clinical findings and outcomes of patients who underwent knotted medial row rotator cuff repair (KT-RCR) compared to patients who underwent knotless medial row rotator cuff repair (KL-RCR).

Methods

A retrospective chart review of 189 patients who had double-row RCR in 2016 was performed at a single institution with 2-year follow-up. Information regarding demographics, preoperative (magnetic resonance imaging), surgical variables including method of suture stabilization, pre- and postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, rates of cuff failure (determined by MRI), and all complications (e.g., infection, adhesive capsulitis, surrounding soft tissue injury) were compiled.

Results

There were 72 patients in the KL-RCR group versus 117 in the KT-RCR group. There was a significant difference in age (55.1 vs 59.1; p=0.002) and in the percentage of patients that underwent RCR on their dominant arm (47.7% vs. 66.7%; p=0.020) in the KL-RCR vs KT-RCR groups respectively. However, there were no significant differences between groups in regards to gender (31.9% female vs 29.9 % female; p=0.895) or side of surgery [45.8% right vs 60.7% right; p=0.065). As determined by MRI grading, there were significantly fewer preoperative small-medium tears (36.8% vs 56.4%; p=0.013) and greater large-massive tears (63.2% vs 43.6%; p=0.013) in the KL-RCR versus KT-RCR groups respectively. There was no significant difference in preoperative ASES scores (48.3 vs 45.4 respectively; p=0.327) between groups. Average follow up time for each group was similar (39.3 months KL-RCR vs 33.5 months KT-RCR; p = 0.057). There was a significant difference in the number of anchors used (3.21 vs. 2.27; p=0.001) between the KL-RCR and KT-RCR groups. Postoperative ASES scores (82.4 vs. 78.8; p=0.579) did not differ between the KL-RCR and KT-RCR groups. There was no significant difference in terms of rates of cuff failure after 2 years, determined by MRI, (5.6% vs 6.1% KL-RCR vs KT RCR; p=1.000) or rates of all complications (11.1% vs 8.6% KL-RCR vs KT RCR; p=0.743).

Conclusions

Our results support the conclusion that pursuing either a knotted or knotless approach to a double-row rotator cuff repair leads to similar outcome scores, rates of cuff failure, and all complications at the two-year period.


More ISAKOS 2021: Global Content