Abstract
Background: Retears after rotator cuff repair (RCR) have been associated with poor clinical results. Meaningful data regarding the role of arthroscopic revision RCR are sparse thus far. Purpose/Hypothesis: To investigate results after arthroscopic revision RCR. We hypothesized that (1) arthroscopic revision RCR would lead to improved outcomes, (2) the clinical results would be dependent on tendon integrity and (3) tear pattern, tendon involvement, and repair technique would influence clinical and structural results. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence 4. Methods: During a 40-month period, 100 patients who underwent arthroscopic revision RCR were prospectively enrolled in this multicenter study. Outcomes were evaluated preoperatively, at 6 months (6M), and at 24 months (24M) using the Constant score (CS), the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), and the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV). Tendon integrity at 2 years was analyzed using magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 13 patients (13%) were lost to follow-up, and 14 patients (14%) had a symptomatic retear before the 24M follow-up. Results: All clinical scores improved significantly during the study period (CS: preoperative, 44 ± 16; 6M, 58 ± 22; 24M, 69 ± 19 points; OSS: preoperative, 27 ± 8; 6M, 36 ± 11; 24M, 40 ± 9 points; SSV: preoperative, 43% ± 18%; 6M, 66% ± 24%; 24M, 75% ± 22%) (P
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Hackl, M., Flury, M., Kolling, C., Nebelung, W., Krauss, C. A., Kraemer, N. A., … Buess, E. (2022). Results of Arthroscopic Revision Rotator Cuff Repair for Failed Open or Arthroscopic Repair: A Prospective Multicenter Study on 100 Cases. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 50(8), 2203–2210. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465221097410
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.