Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
The Bone & Joint Journal

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 6 | Pages 819 - 823
1 Jun 2005
Boehm TD Werner A Radtke S Mueller T Kirschner S Gohlke F

In a prospective, randomised study on the repair of tears of the rotator cuff we compared the clinical results of two suture techniques for which different suture materials were used.

We prospectively randomised 100 patients with tears of the rotator cuff into two groups. Group 1 had transosseous repair with No. 3 Ethibond using modified Mason-Allen sutures and group 2 had transosseous repair with 1.0 mm polydioxanone cord using modified Kessler sutures. After 24 to 30 months the patients were evaluated clinically using the Constant score and by ultrasonography.

Of the 100 patients, 92 completed the study. No significant statistical difference was seen between the two groups: Constant score, 91% vs 92%; rate of further tear, 18% vs 22%; and revision, 4% vs 4%. In cases of further tear the outcome in group 2 did not differ from that for the intact repairs (91% vs 91%), but in group 1 it was significantly worse (94% vs 77%, p = 0.005).

Overall, seven patients had complications which required revision surgery, in four for pain (two in each group) and in three for infection (two in group 1 and one in group 2).


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 85-B, Issue 4 | Pages 545 - 549
1 May 2003
Boehm TD Matzer M Brazda D Gohlke FE

Os acromiale is a rare anatomical abnormality and treatment is controversial. Our retrospective study analyses the outcome of excision, acromioplasty and bony fusion of the os acromiale when it is associated with a tear of the rotator cuff.

After a mean follow-up of 41 months, 33 patients were radiologically and clinically assessed using the Constant score. The surgical procedure was to repair the rotator cuff together with excision of the os acromiale in six patients, acromioplasty in five, and fusion in 22.

Of the 22 attempted fusions seven failed radiologically. The Constant scores were 82%, 81%, 81% and 84% for patients who had excision, acromioplasty, successful fusion and unsuccessful fusion respectively. There were no statistically significant differences.

We conclude that a small mobile os acromiale can be resected, a large stable os acromiale treated by acromioplasty and a large unstable os acromiale by fusion to the acromion. Even without radiological fusion the clinical outcome can be good.