Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 86-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 98 - 98
1 Jan 2004
Rath E Even T Brownlow H Copeland S Levy O
Full Access

Use of shoulder manipulation in the treatment of frozen shoulder (FS) remains controversial. One of the purported risks associated with the procedure is the development of a rotator cuff tear. However the incidence of iatrogenic rotator cuff tears has not been reported. The purpose of the study was to assess the effect of manipulation of the shoulder on the integrity of the rotator cuff.

In a prospective study 20 consecutive patients (21 shoulders) with FS underwent manipulation of the shoulder under anaesthesia (MUA). The average duration of symptoms was 7.3 months (4–18 months). Patients were assessed pre and post manipulation using the Constant score. An ultrasound scan of the rotator cuff was performed before and at 3 weeks after manipulation.

In all patients, pre and post manipulation ultrasound scans showed the rotator cuff to be intact. At 12 weeks after manipulation all patients indicated that they had none or only occasional pain. The mean improvement in motion was 83 degrees (range, 20 – 100°) for flexion, 95 degrees (range, 20 – 120°) for abduction, 58 degrees (range, 0 – 80°) for external rotation and 3 levels of internal rotation (range 3–5 levels). These gains in motion were all significant (p < 0.01). No fractures, dislocations or nerve palsies were observed.

In conclusion manipulation under anaesthesia for treatment of frozen shoulder resulted in significant improvements in shoulder function and pain relief as early as 3 weeks after surgery and was not associated with rotator cuff tears. When performed carefully this procedure is safe and leads to early improvements in pain relief, range of movement and shoulder function.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 96-B, Issue SUPP_12 | Pages 19 - 19
1 Jul 2014
Crosby L
Full Access

Indications for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) require that the patient have a functioning rotator cuff to stabilise the glenohumeral joint. Without rotator cuff integrity the prosthesis will be unstable and the functional result will be less than expected. Physical exam can be difficult in the arthritic shoulder as contractures will limit the range of motion needed to adequately exam the rotator cuff status. The diagnosis can help as osteoarthritis has a 5% incidence of rotator cuff tear while rheumatoid arthritis has an incidence of greater than 40%. MRI can be obtained to determine the rotator cuff status before arthroplasty is performed but may not be necessary. Most total shoulder implant companies have both reverse and anatomic implants available. More recently the uses of platform stems that can be used with either RSA or TSA have been available. With this development in prosthetic design it is no longer necessary to determine the status of the rotator cuff before surgery. The surgeon can make the decision at the time of surgery which implants RSA or TSA will be necessary based on the status of the rotator cuff. There have been recent reports of longer follow up of TSA patients that had fatty atrophy of the infraspinatus muscle that had rotator cuff tears at 10–15 years. MRI may still be warranted in the older individual that is being considered for TSA to determine the quality of the rotator cuff musculature.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 2 | Pages 245 - 249
1 Feb 2017
Barnes LAF Kim HM Caldwell J Buza J Ahmad CS Bigliani LU Levine WN

Aims

Advances in arthroscopic techniques for rotator cuff repair have made the mini-open approach less popular. However, the mini-open approach remains an important technique for repair for many surgeons. The aims of this study were to compare the integrity of the repair, the function of the shoulder and satisfaction post-operatively using these two techniques in patients aged > 50 years.

Patients and Methods

We identified 22 patients treated with mini-open and 128 patients treated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair of July 2007 and June 2011. The mean follow-up was two years (1 to 5). Outcome was assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores, and satisfaction. The integrity of the repair was assessed using ultrasonography. A power analysis ensured sufficient enrolment.