Superior Capsular Reconstruction Versus Middle Trapezius Tendon Transfer for Isolated Irreparable Supraspinatus Tendon Tears: Static Versus Dynamic Reconstruction

Abstract

Background: Both superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) and middle trapezius tendon (MTT) transfer can be performed in nonarthritic young and active patients with isolated irreparable supraspinatus tendon tears (IISTTs). However, to our knowledge, no comparative clinical studies have been conducted on these procedures. Purpose: To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of SCR and arthroscopic-assisted MTT transfer in patients with IISTTs. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 60 patients with IISTTs were categorized into 2 groups according to the surgical procedure—Group S underwent SCR (n = 34); Group M underwent MTT transfer (n = 26). The clinical outcomes included the visual analog scale score for pain, active shoulder range of motion, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and University of California, Los Angeles, shoulder score. Radiological outcomes included the assessment of the acromiohumeral distance, progression of cuff tear arthropathy (Hamada grade), subacromial bone erosion, and graft failure. Results: The mean follow-up time was 39.3 ± 5.2 months (range, 26-59 months) and 37.6 ± 9.8 months (range, 27-54 months) in Group S and Group M, respectively. Significant improvements in clinical outcomes were observed in both groups, while the active forward flexion (148.2°± 24.1° vs 165.9°± 8.7°; P = .003) and abduction (131°± 37.3° vs 152.5°± 17.9°; P = .035) were significantly higher in Group M at the final follow-up. No significant differences were found in the postoperative Constant, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and University of California, Los Angeles, shoulder scores between the 2 groups. Radiologically, although no difference was found in the Hamada grade at the final follow-up between the 2 groups ( P = .143), the rates of acromial wear (58.8% vs 15.4%; P < .001) and graft retear (47.1% vs 7.7%; P < .001) were significantly higher in Group S than in Group M. Conclusion: Both SCR and MTT transfer improved the overall clinical outcomes of IISTTs postoperatively, whereas MTT transfer was superior to SCR in terms of active forward flexion and abduction range of motion. Although higher rates of graft failure and subacromial bone erosion were observed in Group S, no difference was found in the clinical scores between the 2 groups at the short-term follow-up. However, further well-structured, prolonged comparative trials should be conducted in the future.