These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Functional Outcome and Healing With a Load-Sharing Rip-Stop Repair Compared With a Single-Row Repair for Large and Massive Rotator Cuff Tears.
    Author: Noyes MP, Ladermann A, Denard PJ.
    Journal: Arthroscopy; 2019 Aug; 35(8):2295-2300. PubMed ID: 31350083.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the healing rates and functional outcomes of large and massive rotator cuff tears repaired with either a load-sharing rip-stop (LSRS) technique or single-row (SR) repair. METHODS: We performed a retrospective comparison of arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs of large and massive tears performed with 2 different repair techniques. Over a 1-year period, all tears with limited tendon mobility were repaired with an LSRS technique. Over the following 1-year period, all similar tears were repaired with an SR technique. There were 17 patients in the LSRS repair group and 18 in the SR repair group. Healing was assessed with ultrasound at a minimum of 6 months postoperatively, and functional outcome was assessed at a minimum of 24 months. RESULTS: No difference in postoperative range of motion was found between the 2 groups. Likewise, no difference in the visual analog scale score for pain or functional outcomes according to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, or Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score was found between the 2 groups. Complete rotator cuff healing was observed in 53% of LSRS repairs compared with 11% of SR repairs (P = .010). CONCLUSIONS: At short-term follow-up, there is no difference in functional outcomes after an LSRS technique versus an SR repair technique for large and massive rotator cuff tears with limited tendon mobility. However, structural healing appears to be higher with an LSRS technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]