Comparison of clinical outcomes and repair integrity after arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: An observational study

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the differences between mini-open (MO) and arthroscopic (ART) repair procedures for rotator cuff tendon tears in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes. This retrospective study included 59 patients, and data were collected prospectively. Patients with full-thickness rotator cuff tears were randomized to undergo MO or ART repair at 2 centers by 2 surgeons between January 2012 and December 2017. Data were collected 3 weeks before surgery and 6 and 12 months after surgery. Physical function was assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons index, VAS, and Constant scoring system. Radiological outcomes were assessed using the Sugaya classification, adapted for ultrasound. Changes between baseline and follow-up were compared between the 2 groups. Fifty-nine patients who underwent ART or MO rotator cuff repair were included in this study. The 2 groups had similar demographic characteristics and preoperative baseline parameters. Both the MO and ART groups showed statistically significant improvement in outcome parameters (P ≤ .0001); however, cuff repair integrity was significantly better in the ART group (P = .023). All other improvements in the patient-derived parameters were equivalent. None of the patients in either group required revision surgery. According to the results of our retrospective study, MO and ART rotator cuff repair are effective and viable options for surgeons to repair rotator cuff tears. There were no differences in objective and subjective outcomes between the full ART and MO techniques for rotator cuff tears. Surgeons should choose a technique with which they are more familiar.