Mini-open Rotator Cuff Repair Can Still Be a Good Surgical Technique to Repair a Rotator Cuff

Abstract

Background: The clinical outcomes of rotator cuff repair (RCR) surgeries vary because each method has its own advantages and limitations. Objectives: This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of arthroscopic RCR (ARCR) and mini-open RCR (MRCR). Methods: In this study, we included 49 patients with a diagnosis of full rotator cuff tear who had undergone ARCR and MRCR at Poursina Hospital of Rasht and Akhtar Hospital of Tehran from 20 March 2017 to 20 March 2020. The patients were divided into ARCR (n = 24) and MRCR (n = 25) groups. The two surgical procedures were compared with each other before surgery and three and six months after surgery in terms of shoulder function based on UCLA, disability based on QUICKDASH, range of motion (ROM), and pain based on Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Data were analyzed by chi-square, independent t-test, and repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results: There were no differences between the groups in terms of demographic details. The mean duration of surgery was significantly higher in the ARCR group compared to MRCR group (125.5 vs. 70.42 minutes). The short-term outcomes in the two groups on three measurement occasions showed a significant improvement in shoulder function, disability, and ROM in both groups along with a reduction in pain severity (P < 0.05); however, there was no significant difference between the two groups on any of the three occasions (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Shoulder function, disability, ROM, and pain were not different between the two groups, but duration of surgery was less in MRCR group. Therefore, under the same conditions, MRCR is a better choice than ARCR due to its short duration of surgery.