Results of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair for calcific tendonitis: a comparative analysis.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 34481052.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.jse.2021.08.007.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Outcomes following arthroscopic excision of calcific tendonitis and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (CT-ARCR) are relatively limited without comparison analysis to standard arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after CT-ARCR compared against a matched cohort who received standard ARCR. An institutional review board-approved retrospective review was performed for patients aged 18-80 years receiving CT-ARCR by a single surgeon from 2006-2018. These were matched 1:3 with patients receiving ARCR. Patients with concurrent labral repair, subscapularis repair, or glenohumeral joint arthritis procedures; refusal to participate; deceased; inadequate contact information; or those with inadequate records were excluded. PROs included Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS) score; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES); Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE); Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH); patient satisfaction; activity level/symptoms; and sport participation scores. 21 CT-ARCR patients (mean age 50 years, range 36-62) and 54 ARCR patients (mean age 52 years, range 19-77) were included. Minimum 2-year follow-up was obtained in 18 of 21 (86%) CT-ARCR (mean 5.9 years) and 45 of 54 (83%) ARCR patients (mean 5.6 years). CT-ARCR patients improved pre- to postoperation in mean SF-12 PCS (41.1 to 50.0), ASES (54.2 to 94.0), and QuickDASH (54.2 to 94.0). SANE score improvements (57.6 to 82.8) were not significant. ARCR controls improved pre- to postoperation in mean SF-12 PCS (41.4 to 49.0), ASES (59.4 to 88.0), QuickDASH (35.1 to 13.8), and SANE scores (52.6 to 80.8). Pre- to postoperative pain during recreation and sport participation similarly improved in both groups. The only postoperative difference observed between CT-ARCR and ARCR was better patient satisfaction with CT-ARCR (9.7 vs. 8.3). CT-ARCR results in excellent PROs, activity symptoms, and sports participation at final follow-up. CT-ARCR results were comparable to patients who received conventional ARCR for similar-sized rotator cuff tears that did not have calcific tendonitis.
Medical subject headings
- Rotator Cuff Injuries
- Tendinopathy
Anatomy
- shoulder