Outcomes After Revision Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review

Background: Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures; however, it is unclear how to manage patients with symptomatic retears. Purpose: To perform a systematic review to evaluate the outcomes of revision ARCR in the literature. Study Design:...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American journal of sports medicine 2024-05, Vol.52 (6), p.1635-1640
Hauptverfasser: Hurley, Eoghan T., Krez, Alexandra N., Wu, Kevin A., Levin, Jay, Crook, Bryan S., Anakwenze, Oke A., Klifto, Christopher S.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background: Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures; however, it is unclear how to manage patients with symptomatic retears. Purpose: To perform a systematic review to evaluate the outcomes of revision ARCR in the literature. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic literature search based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed utilizing the Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases. Eligible for inclusion were clinical studies reporting on revision rotator cuff repair. Clinical outcomes were recorded. Results: The 17 included studies were composed of 888 shoulders in 885 patients. The mean age of the 885 patients was 58.6 ± 9.1 years, with a mean follow-up of 28.1 ± 22.1 months. The mean visual analog scale score was 2.1 ± 1.8, the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 75.0 ± 18.3, and the mean Constant score was 67.4 ± 16.6. The overall rate of retears after revision was 25.3%, with an 8.0% reoperation rate including 2.7% undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty and 2.0% undergoing subsequent rotator cuff repair. Finally, the complication rate was 8.6%. Conclusion: Revision ARCR improved patient-reported outcomes, with 92% of patients free from reoperations at a mean follow-up of 2 years. Overall, 78.4% of patients were satisfied at final follow-up; however, the rate of retears was found to be higher than after primary ARCR.
ISSN:0363-5465
1552-3365
1552-3365
DOI:10.1177/03635465231185345