Arthroscopic partial repair with versus without biodegradable subacromial spacer for patients with massive rotator cuff tears: a case–control study

Background To investigate whether arthroscopic partial repair with the additional use of a biodegradable subacromial spacer would be proven better treatment for irreparable massive rotator cuff tears (MRCT) compared to single arthroscopic partial repair. Methods A matched-pairs case–control study of...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Musculoskeletal surgery 2021-12, Vol.105 (3), p.247-255
Main Authors: Malahias, M.-A., Brilakis, E., Avramidis, G., Trellopoulos, A., Antonogiannakis, E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Arthroscopy
Care and treatment
Case-Control Studies
Clinical trials
Comparative analysis
DRKS
DRKS00014725
Humans
Medical research
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Medicine, Experimental
Original Article
Orthopedics
Pain
Patient satisfaction
Range of Motion, Articular
Retrospective Studies
Rotator cuff
Rotator Cuff Injuries - diagnostic imaging
Rotator Cuff Injuries - surgery
Surgeons
Surgical Orthopedics
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background To investigate whether arthroscopic partial repair with the additional use of a biodegradable subacromial spacer would be proven better treatment for irreparable massive rotator cuff tears (MRCT) compared to single arthroscopic partial repair. Methods A matched-pairs case–control study of 32 patients suffering from irreparable MRCT who underwent an arthroscopic partial repair with (Group B: 16 patients) or without (Group A: 16 patients) InSpace Balloon (ISB ® ; Orthospace, Caesarea, Israel) implantation was conducted. For the clinical and functional assessment of the patients, the visual analog scale, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), Range of Motion (RoM), and patients’ satisfaction were obtained. Results The two groups were matched in all baseline demographic and clinical characteristics (n.s.). All mean final quantitative postoperative clinical and functional scores of group A (partial repair and ISB) and group B (single partial repair), as well as active RoM, were significantly improved ( t test) in comparison with the mean preoperative values ( p   17, Constant score MCID > 10.4), as well as pain relief and RoM 12 months after surgery. Conclusion Arthroscopic partial repair, either with or without ISB implantation, resulted in significantly improved clinical and functional short-term outcomes for the treatment of MRCT. Patients who were treated with combined partial repair and ISB implantation had a potential propensity toward better functional outcomes and higher patient satisfaction compared to the single-partial-repair-treated group. However, given that these differences were not significant, we feel that further studies are required to clarify the potential therapeutic value of ISB implantation in the treatment of irreparable MRCT. Level of Evidence Level III. Clinical Trials’ registry German Clinical Trials Register (WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform). ID number: DRKS00014725. Date of registration: 07/05/2018.
ISSN:2035-5106
2035-5114
DOI:10.1007/s12306-020-00649-9