Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years

Luís Filipe Senna , Max Rogério Freitas Ramos , Ricardo Folador Bergamaschi
{"title":"Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years","authors":"Luís Filipe Senna ,&nbsp;Max Rogério Freitas Ramos ,&nbsp;Ricardo Folador Bergamaschi","doi":"10.1016/j.rboe.2018.05.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Evaluate and compare the results of single-row (SR) <em>vs.</em> double-row (DR) arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>From December 2009 to May 2013, 115 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs were performed using suture anchors. After applying the exclusion criteria, there were 75 patients (79 shoulders) to be evaluated, retrospectively, of whom 53 (56 shoulders) attended re-evaluation. The patients were divided into two groups: SR with 29 shoulders, and DR) with 27 shoulders. The scoring systems for clinical evaluation were those of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The mean follow-up period in the SR group was 37.8 months <em>vs.</em> 41.0 months in the DR group. The average UCLA score was 30.8 in the SR group <em>vs.</em> 32.6 in the DR group. This difference was not statistically significant (<em>p</em> <!-->&gt;<!--> <!-->0.05). The averages measured by the ASES score also showed no significant difference – 82.3 and 88.8 in the SR and DR groups, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>No statistically significant difference was found between SR and DR arthroscopic rotator cuff repair performed by a single surgeon in the comparative analysis of UCLA and ASES scores.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101095,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition)","volume":"53 4","pages":"Pages 448-453"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rboe.2018.05.010","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2255497118300806","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Objective

Evaluate and compare the results of single-row (SR) vs. double-row (DR) arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Methods

From December 2009 to May 2013, 115 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs were performed using suture anchors. After applying the exclusion criteria, there were 75 patients (79 shoulders) to be evaluated, retrospectively, of whom 53 (56 shoulders) attended re-evaluation. The patients were divided into two groups: SR with 29 shoulders, and DR) with 27 shoulders. The scoring systems for clinical evaluation were those of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES).

Results

The mean follow-up period in the SR group was 37.8 months vs. 41.0 months in the DR group. The average UCLA score was 30.8 in the SR group vs. 32.6 in the DR group. This difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The averages measured by the ASES score also showed no significant difference – 82.3 and 88.8 in the SR and DR groups, respectively.

Conclusion

No statistically significant difference was found between SR and DR arthroscopic rotator cuff repair performed by a single surgeon in the comparative analysis of UCLA and ASES scores.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
关节镜下肩袖修复:单排与双排- 1至4年后的临床结果
目的评价和比较单排(SR)与双排(DR)关节镜下肩袖修复术的效果。方法2009年12月至2013年5月,对115例关节镜下肩袖修补术采用缝合锚钉。应用排除标准后,回顾性评估75例患者(79肩),其中53例(56肩)参加了再评估。患者分为两组:SR组(29肩)和DR组(27肩)。临床评估的评分系统采用加州大学洛杉矶分校(UCLA)和美国肩肘外科医生协会(ASES)的评分系统。结果SR组平均随访时间37.8个月,DR组平均随访时间41.0个月。SR组的UCLA平均得分为30.8,DR组为32.6。这一差异无统计学意义(p >0.05)。平均的as评分也无显著差异,SR组为82.3分,DR组为88.8分。结论单外科医生进行SR和DR关节镜下肩袖修复术的UCLA和ASES评分比较分析无统计学差异。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Surgical treatment of chondral knee defects using a collagen membrane – autologus matrix-induced chondrogenesis Evaluation of the use of tranexamic acid in total knee arthroplasty Clinical and radiographic outcomes of hip resurfacing arthroplasty after eight years – a retrospective study Effect of surgical treatment on the quality of life in patients with non-traumatic avascular necrosis of the femoral head Is there a relationship between the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio and bilaterality in patients with coxarthrosis?
×
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