header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Research

ARE WE EVOLVING TO A SUPERIOR SURGICAL TECHNIQUE FOR IRREPARABLE CUFF TEARS? A COHORT COMPARISON OF INTERPOSITION GRAFTING VERSUS SUPERIOR CAPSULAR RECONSTRUCTION

The European Orthopaedic Research Society (EORS) 2018 Meeting, PART 3, Galway, Ireland, September 2018.



Abstract

Various arthroscopic techniques using differing graft materials have been described and present a potential alternative to arthroplasty for rotator cuff arthropathy. We describe the short-term outcomes of allograft reconstruction, having evolved of our surgical technique from graft interposition to superior capsule reconstruction (SCR). All patients with an irreparable tear, in the absence of clinical and radiograph evidence of osteoarthritis, who underwent an allograft (Graft JacketTM) reconstruction with either an arthroscopic interposition or SCR technique within our institution were included. A retrospective case note analysis was performed to ascertain perioperative details including total operating and consumable implant costs. 15 patients were in the interposition group, mean age 66 years (48–77). Mean postoperative follow-up time was 17 months (1.9 −27.8). The mean OSS improved from 30.6 to 35.7 (p<0.05). Additionally, mean pain scores out of 10 improved from 7.7 to 1.5 (p<0.01). Mean satisfaction for the surgery was 7.8 out of 10. Complications included 2 re-ruptures (13.3%), 1 infection (6.7%) and 1 case of no improvement (6.7%). In the SCR group, there were 10 patients, mean age 64.5 (56– 68 years). Half of these patients had previous rotator cuff surgery. Mean postoperative follow-up time was 8.7 months (1.9 – 16.3). The mean OSS improved from 24 to 32.9 (p<0.01). Similarly, pain scores decreased from 7.9 to 3.5 (p<0.01). Mean satisfaction was 7.2. Complications included 1 case of no improvement (10%) resulting in a reverse TSR and 1 re-rupture (10%). A formal, prospective comparison trial is advocated to determine if SCR is superior.


Email: