Zusammenfassung
Background: Superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) represents a new option for the treatment of irreparable rotator cuff tears. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiologic outcomes of SCR and compare them with the outcomes of partial repair (PR) of the infraspinatus tendon. The hypothesis was that there would be no significant differences between the clinical and ...
Zusammenfassung
Background: Superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) represents a new option for the treatment of irreparable rotator cuff tears. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiologic outcomes of SCR and compare them with the outcomes of partial repair (PR) of the infraspinatus tendon. The hypothesis was that there would be no significant differences between the clinical and radiologic outcome parameters of SCR and PR after a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Of 21 patients who underwent SCR, 20 patients were matched in a 1:1 ratio according to sex, age, and tear configuration with 20 of 60 patients who had undergone PR; all patients were prospectively evaluated for a minimum follow-up of 2 years. The investigated outcome measures included the Constant score; Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score; and radiologic analysis of acromiohumeral distance (AHD) and humeral head centralization (HHC). Results: There were no differences in the demographic data between the SCR and PR groups. The mean age of both groups was 62.3 years (range, 47-79 years), the mean tear configuration was Bateman 3.0 and Patte 2.8, and the mean follow-up period was 29.4 months (range, 24-53 months). At final follow-up, no significant differences were seen between the SCR and PR groups with regard to Constant score (77.1 vs 82.7), age- and sex-adapted Constant score (85.5% vs 91.4%), DASH score (15.6 vs 7.8), or WORC index (81.1 vs 90.4). No significant differences in the AHD or HHC were seen between the groups. The reoperation rate was 4.8% (1/21) in the SCR cohort and 15% (9/60) in the PR cohort. Conclusion: Both SCR and PR resulted in significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes at 2-year follow-up, with no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the 2 techniques. Further follow-up is needed to determine whether there are long-term differences in HHC and development of cuff tear arthropathy. Further investigations should also focus on the cost-effectiveness of the respective procedures.
Altmetric