Is the impact of previous rotator cuff repair on the outcome of reverse shoulder arthroplasty clinically relevant? A systematic review of 2879 shoulders

Author:

Berk Alexander N12,Rao Allison J3,Obana Kyle K4,Ifarraguerri Anna M567,Trofa David P4,Connor Patrick M567,Schiffern Shadley C567,Hamid Nady567,Saltzman Bryan M89ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA

2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA

3. University of Minnesota Physicians, University of Minnesota – Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Minneapolis, MN, USA

4. New York Presbyterian, Columbia University Medical Center – Department of Orthopaedics, New York, NY, USA

5. OrthoCarolina – Sports Medicine Center, Charlotte, NC, USA

6. OrthoCarolina Research Institute, Charlotte, NC, USA

7. Atrium Health – Musculoskeletal Institute, Charlotte, NC, USA

8. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Indiana University Health Physicians, Indianapolis, IN, USA

9. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA

Abstract

Background Outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in patients with prior rotator cuff repair (RCR) remain inconsistent. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to systematically review the current outcomes literature on RSA in patients with prior RCR and to compare the results with controls without prior RCR. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed, and outcome studies reporting on functional and clinical outcomes were included. Results A total of 11 studies encompassing 2879 shoulders were included. Improvements in postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the baseline were higher in controls including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (47.0 vs 39.5), Simple Shoulder Test (6.0 vs 4.9), Constant score (32.6 vs 26.4), and Visual Analog Scale for pain (−5.6 vs −4.9). Improvement in range of motion was greater in the control group, including external rotation (17° vs 11°), anterior elevation (56° vs 43°), and abduction (52° vs 43°). The overall complication rate (8% vs 5%) and revision rate (3% vs 1%) were higher in the RCR group. Discussion Differences in postoperative PROs and improvement from the baseline demonstrate a trend toward lower outcomes in patients with prior RCR but may be below the minimal clinically import difference. Level of evidence IV; systematic review

Publisher

SAGE Publications

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3