J Korean Orthop Assoc.  2020 Feb;55(1):38-45. 10.4055/jkoa.2020.55.1.38.

Arthroscopic Full-Thickness Rotator Cuff Repair in Elderly Patients

• Cheon SJ
• Lee DH
• Park YG
• Son SM

• KMID: 2470767
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4055/jkoa.2020.55.1.38

Abstract

PURPOSE
To examine the clinical and structural outcomes of an at least two-year follow-up of arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repairs with a single-row or suture-bridge technique in patients more than 65 years of age.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Patients diagnosed with a full-thickness rotator cuff tear who were more than 65 years of age, underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair after at least six months of conservative treatment, agreed to take a follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) six months postoperatively, and visited outpatient for at least two years were enrolled in this study. Clinical evaluations were done using The University of California Los Angeles score, Constant Shoulder Score, and visual analogue scale evaluated two years after the surgery. The structural integrity was analyzed using follow-up MRI. During surgery, a suture-bridge technique was used if the rotator cuff tendon could cover half of the footprint under constant tension. Otherwise, single-row repair was performed.
RESULTS
The samples were 158 cases, consisting of 93 single-repairs and 65 suture-bridge repairs. A preoperative comparison of the age distribution, fatty degeneration of supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscle, medial retraction of torn cuff tendon, and tear size between the two groups were not significant. The clinical scores were improved significantly in all cases. The distribution of the structural integrity by Sugaya classification were 49 cases in type 1 (31.0%), 62 cases in type 2 (39.2%), 30 cases in type 3 (19.0%), 11 cases in type 4 (7.0%), and six cases in type 5 (3.8%). The re-tear rate of the single-row group was 9.7% (nine out of 93 cases) and 12.3% (eight out of 65 cases) for the suture-bridge group.
CONCLUSION
Satisfactory clinical and radiological outcomes were achieved after arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair in patients more than 65 years of age. Both single-row and suture-bridge techniques would be beneficial for the elderly.

Keyword

full-thickness rotator cuff tear; more than 65 years of age; single-row repair; suture-bridge repair

MeSH Terms

Age Distribution
Aged*
California
Classification
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Outpatients
Rotator Cuff*
Shoulder
Tears
Tendons

Reference

1. Jeong J, Shin DC, Kim TH, Kim K. Prevalence of asymptomatic rotator cuff tear and their related factors in the Korean population. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017; 26:30–35.

2. Fehringer EV, Sun J, VanOeveren LS, Keller BK, Matsen FA 3rd. Full-thickness rotator cuff tear prevalence and correlation with function and co-morbidities in patients sixty-five years and older. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008; 17:881–885.

3. Bhatia S, Greenspoon JA, Horan MP, Warth RJ, Millett PJ. Two-year outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in recreational athletes older than 70 years. Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43:1737–1742.

4. Verma NN, Bhatia S, Baker CL 3rd, et al. Outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients aged 70 years or older. Arthroscopy. 2010; 26:1273–1280.

5. Bedeir YH, Jimenez AE, Grawe BM. Recurrent tears of the rotator cuff: Effect of repair technique and management options. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2018; 10:7593.

6. Millett PJ, Warth RJ, Dornan GJ, Lee JT, Spiegl UJ. Clinical and structural outcomes after arthroscopic single-row versus double-row rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of level I randomized clinical trials. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014; 23:586–597.

7. Kim KC, Shin HD, Lee WY, Han SC. Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: double-row versus suture-bridge technique. Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40:294–299.

8. Boyer P, Bouthors C, Delcourt T, et al. Arthroscopic double-row cuff repair with suture-bridging: a structural and functional comparison of two techniques. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23:478–486.

9. Lee KW, Yang DS, Lee GS, Ma CH, Choy WS. Clinical outcomes and repair integrity after arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair: suture-bridge versus double-row modified Mason-Allen technique. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018; 27:1953–1959.

10. Gartsman GM, Drake G, Edwards TB, et al. Ultrasound evaluation of arthroscopic full-thickness supraspinatus rotator cuff repair: single-row versus double-row suture bridge (transosseous equivalent) fixation. Results of a prospective, randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013; 22:1480–1487.

11. Wade R, Salgar S. Clinico-radiological evaluation of retear rate in arthroscopic double row versus single row repair technique in full thickness rotator cuff tear. J Orthop. 2017; 14:313–318.

12. Fei W, Guo W. A biomechanical and histological comparison of the suture bridge and conventional double-row techniques of the repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears in a rabbit model. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015; 16:148.

13. Ruotolo C, Fow JE, Nottage WM. The supraspinatus footprint: an anatomic study of the supraspinatus insertion. Arthroscopy. 2004; 20:246–249.

14. Thigpen CA, Shaffer MA, Gaunt BW, Leggin BG, Williams GR, Wilcox RB 3rd. The American Society of Shoulder and Elbow Therapists' consensus statement on rehabilitation following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016; 25:521–535.

15. DeOrio JK, Cofield RH. Results of a second attempt at surgical repair of a failed initial rotator-cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984; 66:563–567.

16. Patte D. Classification of rotator cuff lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990; 254:81–86.

17. Goutallier D, Postel JM, Bernageau J, Lavau L, Voisin MC. Fatty muscle degeneration in cuff ruptures. Pre- and postoperative evaluation by CT scan. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994; 304:78–83.

18. Kluger R, Bock P, Mittlböck M, Krampla W, Engel A. Long-term survivorship of rotator cuff repairs using ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2011; 39:2071–2081.

19. Sugaya H, Maeda K, Matsuki K, Moriishi J. Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair. A prospective outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89:953–960.

20. Valencia Mora M, Morcillo Barrenechea D, Martín Ríos MD, Foruria AM, Calvo E. Clinical outcome and prognostic factors of revision arthroscopic rotator cuff tear repair. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017; 25:2157–2163.

21. Flurin PH, Hardy P, Abadie P, et al. French Arthroscopy Society (SFA). Rotator cuff tears after 70 years of age: a prospective, randomized, comparative study between decompression and arthroscopic repair in 154 patients. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013; 99:8 Suppl. S371–S378.

22. Rhee YG, Cho NS, Yoo JH. Clinical outcome and repair integrity after rotator cuff repair in patients older than 70 years versus patients younger than 70 years. Arthroscopy. 2014; 30:546–554.

23. Moraiti C, Valle P, Maqdes A, et al. Comparison of functional gains after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients over 70 years of age versus patients under 50 years of age: a prospective multicenter study. Arthroscopy. 2015; 31:184–190.

24. Gerhardt C, Hug K, Pauly S, Marnitz T, Scheibel M. Arthroscopic single-row modified mason-allen repair versus double-row suture bridge reconstruction for supraspinatus tendon tears: a matched-pair analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40:2777–2785.

25. Kim YK, Moon SH, Cho SH. Treatment outcomes of single-versus double-row repair for larger than medium-sized rotator cuff tears: the effect of preoperative remnant tendon length. Am J Sports Med. 2013; 41:2270–2277.

26. Stahnke K, Nikulka C, Diederichs G, Haneveld H, Scheibel M, Gerhardt C. Serial MRI evaluation following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in double-row technique. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016; 136:665–672.