COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic conversion to a full-thickness rotator cuff tear: articular- versus bursal-side partial tears.

BACKGROUND: A few studies have compared high-grade partial-thickness articular- and bursal-side rotator cuff tears postoperatively.

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of high-grade partial-thickness rotator cuff tears treated with arthroscopic conversion to full-thickness tears, followed by repair.

STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS: Forty-three consecutive shoulders with high-grade partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (20 articular- and 23 bursal-side lesions) treated with arthroscopic conversion to full-thickness tears, followed by repair using the suture-bridge technique, were evaluated. The final functional evaluation was conducted at a mean of 35.53 months (range, 24-54 months). Radiological outcomes were evaluated at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively. The following outcome measures were used in this study: the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder Rating Scale, the Constant score, and range of motion.

RESULTS: At the final follow-up, the mean ASES, UCLA, and Constant scores improved significantly to 91.80, 32.70, and 75.85, respectively, in the articular-side group (all P < .001). The mean ASES, UCLA, and Constant scores improved significantly to 90.80, 32.52, and 83.00, respectively, in the bursal-side group (all P < .001). The UCLA and ASES scores did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (P = .821 and .869, respectively), while the Constant scores did (P = .048). The retear rate was 0% in the articular-side group and 9.5% in the bursal-side group; this difference was not significant (P = .204).

CONCLUSION: The arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness bursal-side tears resulted in comparable or superior postoperative functional outcomes compared with that of articular-side tears. However, the postoperative retear rate did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app