Prospective study of tendon healing and functional gain after arthroscopic repair of isolated supraspinatus tear

Affiliation auteurs!!!! Error affiliation !!!!
TitreProspective study of tendon healing and functional gain after arthroscopic repair of isolated supraspinatus tear
Type de publicationJournal Article
Year of Publication2020
AuteursBagheri N, Bonnevialle N, Gallinet D, Barth J, Labattut L, Metais P, Godeneche A, Garret J, Clavert P, Fatras-Meyer I, Collin P, Soc FArthroscop
JournalORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH
Volume106
PaginationS201-S206
Date PublishedDEC
Type of ArticleArticle
ISSN1877-0568
Mots-clésConstant score, Rotator cuff, Sugaya classification, Supraspinatus
Résumé

Introduction In case of failure of non-operative treatment of isolated supraspinatus tear, tendon surgery can improve shoulder function and alleviate pain. The present study hypothesis was that isolated supraspinatus repair shows good healing, with improved clinical results. Materials and methods A prospective multicentre study followed up 199 patients (mean age, 57 years) for one year. Inclusion criteria comprised: isolated full-thickness supraspinatus tear, retraction grade < 3, with the same double-row arthroscopic technique. Clinical assessment used Constant score at 6 weeks and 3, 6 and 12 months. Ultrasound control checked tendon repair quality on the Sugaya criteria, types I-II-III being considered as healed. Results At one year, mean Constant score had increased by 26 points (p < 0.001). Healing rate was 94% (n = 187): Sugaya type I, 46% (n = 92); type II, 41% (n = 81); type III, 7% (n = 14). Mean Constant score was significantly higher in case of healing: 81 vs. 70 points (p = 0.002). Constant score progression was identical in both healing groups throughout follow-up. Univariate analysis showed no correlation between epidemiological or tear-related factors and tendon healing. Conclusion Arthroscopic repair of isolated small supraspinatus tear provided 94% healing. Clinical results were better when healing was achieved. Level of evidence I, prospective cohort study. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

DOI10.1016/j.otsr.2020.08.007