Traumatic and Atraumatic Rotator Cuff Tears Have the Same Rates of Healing

Alberto Guevara-Alvarez M.D. , Edwin A. Valencia-Ramon M.D. , Hugo Bothorel M.Eng. , Philippe Collin M.D. , Jeanni Zbinden M.D. , Alberto Guizzi M.D. , Alexandre Lädermann M.D.
{"title":"Traumatic and Atraumatic Rotator Cuff Tears Have the Same Rates of Healing","authors":"Alberto Guevara-Alvarez M.D. ,&nbsp;Edwin A. Valencia-Ramon M.D. ,&nbsp;Hugo Bothorel M.Eng. ,&nbsp;Philippe Collin M.D. ,&nbsp;Jeanni Zbinden M.D. ,&nbsp;Alberto Guizzi M.D. ,&nbsp;Alexandre Lädermann M.D.","doi":"10.1016/j.asmr.2023.100867","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>To examine whether traumatic rotator cuff repairs (RCRs) differ in postoperative rotator cuff tendon integrity and functional outcomes from degenerative RCRs.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>RCRs performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively identified. The inclusion criteria were repairable Goutallier grades 0 to 2 full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Demographic and clinical data as well as radiological results were compared. A multivariate logistic regression of the of patient acceptable symptom state for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score was performed to evaluate whether the origin of tear led to a different relative risk (RR) independently from tear and surgical characteristics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 616 consecutive shoulders (304 traumatic and 312 degenerative) were finally included. Traumatic ruptures presented a greater distribution of male (72% vs 51%, <em>P</em> &lt; .001) and younger patients (53 vs 57 years, <em>P</em> &lt; .001), as well as earlier onset of symptoms (3 vs 15 months, <em>P</em> &lt; .001), reduced range of motion in preoperative assessment for forward elevation (130° vs 150°, <em>P</em> &lt; .001), and slightly greater preoperative ASES (46.5 ± 19.7 vs 50.0 ± 18.0, <em>P</em> = .022) and Constant (47.0 ± 20.2 vs 52.0 ± 18.9, <em>P</em> = .001) scores. Degenerative tears presented a lower proportion of grade 3 tendon coronal retraction (11% vs 18%, <em>P</em> = .031). Postoperative tendon integrity at 6 months was comparable for both groups, predominantly Sugaya types 1 and 2 (91% traumatic; 92% degenerative, <em>P</em> = .371). Both groups exhibited favorable outcomes in range of motion and postoperative functional scores at last follow-up. The multivariate regression confirmed that the tear origin was not significantly associated with patient acceptable symptom state achievement (<em>P</em> = .201) but rather with greater preoperative ASES score (RR, 1.01), men (RR, 1.16) and workers’ compensation (RR, 0.65) (<em>P</em> &lt; .05).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Traumatic cases were frequent, involved younger patients, more frequently affected the anterior rotator cuff, and were associated with more severe tendon retraction. Traumatic and degenerative RCRs lead to comparable clinical and radiologic results.</p></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><p>Level III, retrospective comparative study.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34631,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":"6 2","pages":"Article 100867"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X23002183/pdfft?md5=d8ed767671865c7928b411902f345957&pid=1-s2.0-S2666061X23002183-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X23002183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

To examine whether traumatic rotator cuff repairs (RCRs) differ in postoperative rotator cuff tendon integrity and functional outcomes from degenerative RCRs.

Methods

RCRs performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively identified. The inclusion criteria were repairable Goutallier grades 0 to 2 full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Demographic and clinical data as well as radiological results were compared. A multivariate logistic regression of the of patient acceptable symptom state for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score was performed to evaluate whether the origin of tear led to a different relative risk (RR) independently from tear and surgical characteristics.

Results

A total of 616 consecutive shoulders (304 traumatic and 312 degenerative) were finally included. Traumatic ruptures presented a greater distribution of male (72% vs 51%, P < .001) and younger patients (53 vs 57 years, P < .001), as well as earlier onset of symptoms (3 vs 15 months, P < .001), reduced range of motion in preoperative assessment for forward elevation (130° vs 150°, P < .001), and slightly greater preoperative ASES (46.5 ± 19.7 vs 50.0 ± 18.0, P = .022) and Constant (47.0 ± 20.2 vs 52.0 ± 18.9, P = .001) scores. Degenerative tears presented a lower proportion of grade 3 tendon coronal retraction (11% vs 18%, P = .031). Postoperative tendon integrity at 6 months was comparable for both groups, predominantly Sugaya types 1 and 2 (91% traumatic; 92% degenerative, P = .371). Both groups exhibited favorable outcomes in range of motion and postoperative functional scores at last follow-up. The multivariate regression confirmed that the tear origin was not significantly associated with patient acceptable symptom state achievement (P = .201) but rather with greater preoperative ASES score (RR, 1.01), men (RR, 1.16) and workers’ compensation (RR, 0.65) (P < .05).

Conclusions

Traumatic cases were frequent, involved younger patients, more frequently affected the anterior rotator cuff, and were associated with more severe tendon retraction. Traumatic and degenerative RCRs lead to comparable clinical and radiologic results.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
创伤性和非创伤性肩袖撕裂的愈合率相同
背景研究创伤性肩袖修复术(RCR)与退行性肩袖修复术在术后肩袖肌腱完整性和功能结果方面是否存在差异。纳入标准为可修复的 Goutallier 0 至 2 级全厚肩袖撕裂。比较了人口统计学和临床数据以及放射学结果。对美国肩肘外科医生(ASES)评分的患者可接受症状状态进行了多变量逻辑回归,以评估撕裂起源是否会导致与撕裂和手术特征不同的相对风险(RR)。创伤性肩关节断裂患者中男性(72% 对 51%,P < .001)和年轻患者(53 岁对 57 岁,P < .001)的比例更高,而且症状出现时间更早(3 个月对 15 个月,P < .001),活动范围更小。001),术前评估向前抬高的活动范围较小(130° vs 150°,P < .001),术前 ASES(46.5 ± 19.7 vs 50.0 ± 18.0,P = .022)和 Constant(47.0 ± 20.2 vs 52.0 ± 18.9,P = .001)评分略高。退行性撕裂的肌腱冠状面3级回缩比例较低(11% vs 18%,P = .031)。术后 6 个月时,两组肌腱的完整性相当,主要是 Sugaya 1 型和 2 型(91% 为创伤性;92% 为退行性,P = .371)。最后一次随访时,两组患者的活动范围和术后功能评分均显示出良好的结果。多变量回归证实,撕裂起源与患者可接受的症状状态成就(P = .201)无显著关联,而是与术前更高的 ASES 评分(RR,1.01)、男性(RR,1.16)和工伤赔偿(RR,0.65)(P <.05)有关。创伤性和退行性 RCR 的临床和放射学结果相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
218
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊最新文献
Continuous Meniscal Repair Technique Allows for Shorter Operative Time and Learning Curve Compared With Traditional Vertical Mattress Technique in Controlled Arthroscopic Training in Porcine Model Concomitant Popliteomeniscal Fascicles Tears Are Found in 21% of Professional Soccer Players With Acute Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries Mini-Open Technique for Gluteus Medius Tendon Repairs Is Associated With Low Complication Rates and Sustained Improvement in Patient Reported Outcomes at 2-Year Follow-Up The Top-20 Studies About Anterior Shoulder Instability From an Altmetric Analysis Had Higher Levels of Evidence Than Those From a Traditional Bibliometric Analysis Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Augmented With a Reinforced Bioinductive Implant Is Biomechanically Similar to the Native Medial Patellofemoral Ligament at Time Zero in a Cadaveric Model
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1