Dataset Information

Massive Rotator Cuff Repair: Banana SutureLasso Double-Row Fixation.

ABSTRACT: Massive rotator cuff tears have always been a worrisome situation to every orthopaedic surgeon. Patients' functional demands are increasing with time, and this is why we aim to offer them the best options to preserve their quality of life. We found that using the Banana SutureLasso (Arthrex) has made this type of surgery much easier. We think that with the Banana SutureLasso (Arthrex) we have more access to the medial part of the rotator cuff, and that we can grab both the deep and superficial layers of the tendons while diminishing the risk of laceration. We combined an X-suture with a double-row fixation using a Corkscrew (Arthrex) on the humeral tuberosity and a SwiveLock (Arthrex) screw on lateral side of the humerus. We used only 3 portals with an extra parking portal. Another advantage is that we can adjust the sutures so they would be perpendicular to both ends of the tear. Our technique is simple, safe, and reproducible.

SUBMITTER: Kamel A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7953078 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe long-term outcomes of single- versus double-row fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair are not currently known.PurposeTo compare the treatment effects of the single- versus double-row suture technique in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair of full-thickness tears at 10-year follow-up.Study designRandomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.MethodsPatients were evaluated at 10 years postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC). Secondary outcome measures included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Constant score, strength, and incidence of revision surgery. Ultrasound was used to evaluate the rotator cuff to determine repair integrity. Statistical analyses consistent with those of the main trial were conducted.ResultsOf the original 90 participants, 77 (85%) returned at a mean follow-up of 10 years. At ten year follow-up, the WORC score was higher in the double row group (79.9 [95% CI, 16.2 to 99.1]) compared with the single row group (72.9, [95% CI, 4.3 to 100]), P = .020. From baseline to 2 years, the mean change in WORC scores for the single-row group was -48.5 compared with -40.6 for the double-row group, with a between-group difference of -7.8 (95% CI, -20.4 to 4.7). From 2 to 10 years, the change in WORC scores for the single-row group was 11.5 compared with -0.2 for the double-row group, with a between-group difference of 11.7 (95% CI, -0.7 to 24.3). From baseline to 10 years, the mean between-group difference was 3.9 (95% CI, -7.8 to 15.6). Similarly, a decrease in ASES scores was observed between 2 and 10 years for the single-row group (9.2 [95% CI, 0.9 to 17.5]; P = .029), with a nonsignificant decrease in ASES scores for the double-row group (6.2 [95% CI, -3.2 to 15.6]; P = .195) as well as a decrease in Constant scores for both the single- (9.5 [95% CI, 1.4 to 17.5]; P = .020) and double-row (14.4 [95% CI, 5.6 to 23.3]; P = .001) groups. Overall, 3 participants developed a full-thickness tear after 2 years: 2 from the double-row group and 1 from the single-row group. One participant from each study group underwent revision surgery after the 2-year time point.ConclusionA statistically significant (but likely not clinically important) difference in WORC scores was seen at 10-year follow-up in favor of double-row fixation. Between baseline and 10-year follow-up, a decrease in most outcome scores was observed in both the single- and the double-row groups.RegistrationNCT00508183 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Project description:BACKGROUND: The single-row and double-row fixation techniques have been widely used for rotator cuff tears. However, whether the double-row technique produces superior clinical or anatomic outcomes is still considered controversial. This study aims to use meta-analysis to compare the clinical and anatomical outcomes between the two techniques. METHODS: The Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched for relevant studies published before November 1, 2012. Studies clearly reporting a comparison of the single-row and double-row techniques were selected. The Constant, ASES, and UCLA scale systems and the rotator cuff integrity rate were evaluated. The weighted mean differences and relative risks were calculated using a fixed-effects or random-effects model. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. The weighted mean differences of the ASES (-0.84; P?=?0.04; I(2)?=?0%) and UCLA (-0.75; P?=?0.007; I(2)?=?0%) scales were significantly low in the single-row group for full-thickness rotator cuff tears. For tear sizes smaller than 3 cm, no significant difference was found between the groups no matter in Constant (P?=?0.95; I(2)?=?0%), ASES (P?=?0.77; I(2)?=?0%), or UCLA (P?=?0.24; I(2)?=?13%) scales. For tear sizes larger than 3 cm, the ASES (-1.95; P?=?0.001; I(2)?=?49%) and UCLA (-1.17; P?=?0.006; I(2)?=?0%) scales were markedly lower in the single-row group. The integrity of the rotator cuff (0.81; P?=?0.0004; I(2)?=?10%) was greater and the partial thickness retear rate (1.93; P?=?0.007; I(2)?=?10%) was less in the double-row group. Full-thickness retears showed no difference between the groups (P?=?0.15; I(2)?=?0%). CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis suggests that the double-row fixation technique increases post-operative rotator cuff integrity and improves the clinical outcomes, especially for full-thickness rotator cuff tears larger than 3 cm. For tear sizes smaller than 3 cm, there was no difference in the clinical outcomes between the two techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

Dataset Information

Massive Rotator Cuff Repair: Banana SutureLasso Double-Row Fixation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets