A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing arthroscopic single- and double-row rotator cuff repair

Magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical evaluation

Robert T. Burks, Julia Crim, Nick Brown, Barbara Fink, Patrick E. Greis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

178 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has become more popular, and some studies have shown better footprint coverage and improved biomechanics of the repair. Hypothesis: Double-row rotator cuff repair leads to superior cuff integrity and early clinical results compared with single-row repair. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.Methods: Forty patients were randomized to either single-row or double-row rotator cuff repair at the time of surgical intervention. Patients were followed with clinical measures (UCLA, Constant, WORC, SANE, ASES, as well as range of motion, internal rotation strength, and external rotation strength). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were performed on each shoulder preoperatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year after repair. Results: Mean anteroposterior tear size by MRI was 1.8 cm. A mean of 2.25 anchors for single row (SR) and 3.2 for double row (DR) were used. There were 2 retears at 1 year in each group. There were 2 additional cases that had severe thinning in the DR repair group at 1 year. The MRI measurements of footprint coverage, tendon thickness, and tendon signal showed no significant differences between the 2 repair groups. At 1 year, there were no differences in any of the postoperative measures of motion or strength. At 1 year, mean WORC (SR, 84.8; DR, 87.9), Constant (SR, 77.8; DR, 74.4), ASES (SR, 85.9; DR, 85.5), UCLA (SR, 28.6; DR, 29.5), and SANE (SR, 90.9; DR, 89.9) scores showed no significant differences between groups. Conclusions: No clinical or MRI differences were seen between patients repaired with a SR or DR technique.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)674-682
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Sports Medicine
Volume37
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Rotator Cuff
Randomized Controlled Trials
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Tendons
Articular Range of Motion
Tears
Biomechanical Phenomena

Cite this

@article{bc1b33371f254579b95607a66301cd78,
title = "A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing arthroscopic single- and double-row rotator cuff repair: Magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical evaluation",
abstract = "Background: Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has become more popular, and some studies have shown better footprint coverage and improved biomechanics of the repair. Hypothesis: Double-row rotator cuff repair leads to superior cuff integrity and early clinical results compared with single-row repair. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.Methods: Forty patients were randomized to either single-row or double-row rotator cuff repair at the time of surgical intervention. Patients were followed with clinical measures (UCLA, Constant, WORC, SANE, ASES, as well as range of motion, internal rotation strength, and external rotation strength). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were performed on each shoulder preoperatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year after repair. Results: Mean anteroposterior tear size by MRI was 1.8 cm. A mean of 2.25 anchors for single row (SR) and 3.2 for double row (DR) were used. There were 2 retears at 1 year in each group. There were 2 additional cases that had severe thinning in the DR repair group at 1 year. The MRI measurements of footprint coverage, tendon thickness, and tendon signal showed no significant differences between the 2 repair groups. At 1 year, there were no differences in any of the postoperative measures of motion or strength. At 1 year, mean WORC (SR, 84.8; DR, 87.9), Constant (SR, 77.8; DR, 74.4), ASES (SR, 85.9; DR, 85.5), UCLA (SR, 28.6; DR, 29.5), and SANE (SR, 90.9; DR, 89.9) scores showed no significant differences between groups. Conclusions: No clinical or MRI differences were seen between patients repaired with a SR or DR technique.",
keywords = "Double row, Rotator cuff repair, Single row",
author = "Burks, {Robert T.} and Julia Crim and Nick Brown and Barbara Fink and Greis, {Patrick E.}",
year = "2009",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1177/0363546508328115",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "674--682",
journal = "The Journal of sports medicine",
issn = "0363-5465",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing arthroscopic single- and double-row rotator cuff repair : Magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical evaluation. / Burks, Robert T.; Crim, Julia; Brown, Nick; Fink, Barbara; Greis, Patrick E.

In: American Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 37, No. 4, 04.2009, p. 674-682.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing arthroscopic single- and double-row rotator cuff repair

T2 - Magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical evaluation

AU - Burks, Robert T.

AU - Crim, Julia

AU - Brown, Nick

AU - Fink, Barbara

AU - Greis, Patrick E.

PY - 2009/4

Y1 - 2009/4

N2 - Background: Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has become more popular, and some studies have shown better footprint coverage and improved biomechanics of the repair. Hypothesis: Double-row rotator cuff repair leads to superior cuff integrity and early clinical results compared with single-row repair. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.Methods: Forty patients were randomized to either single-row or double-row rotator cuff repair at the time of surgical intervention. Patients were followed with clinical measures (UCLA, Constant, WORC, SANE, ASES, as well as range of motion, internal rotation strength, and external rotation strength). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were performed on each shoulder preoperatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year after repair. Results: Mean anteroposterior tear size by MRI was 1.8 cm. A mean of 2.25 anchors for single row (SR) and 3.2 for double row (DR) were used. There were 2 retears at 1 year in each group. There were 2 additional cases that had severe thinning in the DR repair group at 1 year. The MRI measurements of footprint coverage, tendon thickness, and tendon signal showed no significant differences between the 2 repair groups. At 1 year, there were no differences in any of the postoperative measures of motion or strength. At 1 year, mean WORC (SR, 84.8; DR, 87.9), Constant (SR, 77.8; DR, 74.4), ASES (SR, 85.9; DR, 85.5), UCLA (SR, 28.6; DR, 29.5), and SANE (SR, 90.9; DR, 89.9) scores showed no significant differences between groups. Conclusions: No clinical or MRI differences were seen between patients repaired with a SR or DR technique.

AB - Background: Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has become more popular, and some studies have shown better footprint coverage and improved biomechanics of the repair. Hypothesis: Double-row rotator cuff repair leads to superior cuff integrity and early clinical results compared with single-row repair. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.Methods: Forty patients were randomized to either single-row or double-row rotator cuff repair at the time of surgical intervention. Patients were followed with clinical measures (UCLA, Constant, WORC, SANE, ASES, as well as range of motion, internal rotation strength, and external rotation strength). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were performed on each shoulder preoperatively, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year after repair. Results: Mean anteroposterior tear size by MRI was 1.8 cm. A mean of 2.25 anchors for single row (SR) and 3.2 for double row (DR) were used. There were 2 retears at 1 year in each group. There were 2 additional cases that had severe thinning in the DR repair group at 1 year. The MRI measurements of footprint coverage, tendon thickness, and tendon signal showed no significant differences between the 2 repair groups. At 1 year, there were no differences in any of the postoperative measures of motion or strength. At 1 year, mean WORC (SR, 84.8; DR, 87.9), Constant (SR, 77.8; DR, 74.4), ASES (SR, 85.9; DR, 85.5), UCLA (SR, 28.6; DR, 29.5), and SANE (SR, 90.9; DR, 89.9) scores showed no significant differences between groups. Conclusions: No clinical or MRI differences were seen between patients repaired with a SR or DR technique.

KW - Double row

KW - Rotator cuff repair

KW - Single row

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67650327271&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0363546508328115

DO - 10.1177/0363546508328115

M3 - Article

VL - 37

SP - 674

EP - 682

JO - The Journal of sports medicine

JF - The Journal of sports medicine

SN - 0363-5465

IS - 4

ER -