CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2022; 57(03): 472-479
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735943
Artigo Original

Arthroscopic Repair of Rotator Cuff Injury: An Analysis of Function, Muscular Strength and Pain Between Single Row and Double Row Techniques

Article in several languages: português | English
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
2   Hospital Ortopédico e Medicina Especializada, Instituto de Pesquisa e Ensino, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
3   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
2   Hospital Ortopédico e Medicina Especializada, Instituto de Pesquisa e Ensino, Brasília, DF, Brasil
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the patients submitted to arthroscopic repair of the rotator cuff (RC), comparing the functional results, muscle strength, and pain obtained after single row (SR) and double row (DR) techniques.

Methods Data were collected at the postoperative follow-up (minimum of 12 months) of 128 patients submitted to arthroscopic RC repair from 2011 to 2018. The clinical-functional variables were collected through the clinical examination, and the demographic, surgical and injury variables of the RC were collected from the electronic medical records. The results were compared between the SR and DR groups.

Results The DR group showed higher anterior elevation strength when compared with the SR group (SF: 4.72 ± 2.73 kg versus DR: 5.90 ± 2.73 kg; p = 0.017). The other variables of muscle strength, Constant-Murley Score, University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale (UCLA), and pain, were similar. Performing the stratification by size, in the analysis of small and medium injuries, no differences were found between the groups. However, in the analysis of large and extensive injuries, patients submitted to DR presented superiority of both muscle lifting strength (SF: 3.98 ± 2.24 kg versus DR: 6.39 ± 2.73 kg) and Constant score (SF: 81 ± 10 versus DR: 88 ± 7).

Conclusion The use of the DR technique in arthroscopic RC repair allowed higher levels of muscle strength for anterior shoulder elevation when compared with the SF technique. Data stratification in large and extensive injuries showed superiority of anterior shoulder elevation muscle strength and of the Constant score in patients submitted to DR.

Financial Support

There was no financial support from public, commercial, or non-profit sources.


* Work developed at the Hospital Ortopédico e Medicina Especializada, Instituto de Pesquisa e Ensino, Brasília, DF, Brazil.




Publication History

Received: 29 July 2020

Accepted: 23 April 2021

Article published online:
21 January 2022

© 2022. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 
  • Referências

  • 1 Sambandam SN, Khanna V, Gul A, Mounasamy V. Rotator cuff tears: An evidence based approach. World J Orthop 2015; 6 (11) 902-918
  • 2 Carvalho AL, Martinelli F, Tramujas L, Baggio M, Crocetta MS, Martins RO. Rotator cuff injuries and factors associated with reoperation. Rev Bras Ortop 2016; 51 (03) 298-302
  • 3 Dang A, Davies M. Rotator Cuff Disease: Treatment Options and Considerations. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 2018; 26 (03) 129-133
  • 4 Oliva F, Piccirilli E, Bossa M. et al. I.S.Mu.L.T - Rotator Cuff Tears Guidelines. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J 2016; 5 (04) 227-263
  • 5 Malavolta EA, Assunção JH, Beraldo RA, Pinto GMR, Gracitelli MEC, Ferreira NetoAA. Rotator cuff repair in the Brazilian Unified Health System: Brazilian trends from 2003 to 2015. Rev Bras Ortop 2017; 52 (04) 501-505
  • 6 Vieira FA, Olawa PJ, Belangero PS, Arliani GG, Figueiredo EA, Ejnisman B. Rotator cuff injuries: current perspectives and trends for treatment and rehabilitation. Rev Bras Ortop 2015; 50 (06) 647-651
  • 7 DeHaan AM, Axelrad TW, Kaye E, Silvestri L, Puskas B, Foster TE. Does double-row rotator cuff repair improve functional outcome of patients compared with single-row technique? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40 (05) 1176-1185
  • 8 Chen M, Xu W, Dong Q, Huang Q, Xie Z, Mao Y. Outcomes of single-row versus double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence. Arthroscopy 2013; 29 (08) 1437-1449
  • 9 Ying ZM, Lin T, Yan SG. Arthroscopic single-row versus double-row technique for repairing rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop Surg 2014; 6 (04) 300-312
  • 10 Sobhy MH, Khater AH, Hassan MR, El Shazly O. Do functional outcomes and cuff integrity correlate after single- versus double-row rotator cuff repair? A systematic review and meta-analysis study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2018; 28 (04) 593-605
  • 11 Senna LF, Ramos MRF, Bergamaschi RF. Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row - clinical results after one to four years. Rev Bras Ortop 2018; 53 (04) 448-453
  • 12 Huang AL, Thavorn K, van Katwyk S, MacDonald P, Lapner P. Double-Row Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Is More Cost-Effective Than Single-Row Repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (20) 1730-1736
  • 13 Lo IK, Burkhart SS. Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: re-establishing the footprint of the rotator cuff. Arthroscopy 2003; 19 (09) 1035-1042
  • 14 Davidson J, Burkhart SS. The geometric classification of rotator cuff tears: a system linking tear pattern to treatment and prognosis. Arthroscopy 2010; 26 (03) 417-424
  • 15 Andrade RP, Correa Filho MRC, Queiroz BC. Lesões do manguito rotador. Rev Bras Ortop 2004; 39 (11/12): 621-635
  • 16 Amstutz HC, Sew Hoy AL, Clarke IC. UCLA anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1981; (155) 7-20
  • 17 Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987; (214) 160-164
  • 18 Scott J, Huskisson EC. Graphic representation of pain. Pain 1976; 2 (02) 175-184
  • 19 Barreto RP, Barbosa ML, Balbinotti MA, Mothes FC, da Rosa LH, Silva MF. The Brazilian version of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS-BR): convergent and construct validity, internal consistency, and unidimensionality. Rev Bras Ortop 2016; 51 (05) 515-520
  • 20 Oku EC, Andrade AP, Stadiniky SP, Carrera EF, Tellini GG. Tradução e adaptação cultural do Modified-University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale para a língua portuguesa. Rev Bras Reumatol 2006; 46 (04) 246-252
  • 21 Carbonel I, Martinez AA, Calvo A, Ripalda J, Herrera A. Single-row versus double-row arthroscopic repair in the treatment of rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomized clinical study. Int Orthop 2012; 36 (09) 1877-1883
  • 22 Godinho GG, França FdeO, Freitas JM. et al. Result from arthroscopic surgical treatment of renewed tearing of the rotator cuff of the shoulder. Rev Bras Ortop 2015; 50 (01) 89-93
  • 23 Miyazaki AN, da Silva LA, Santos PD, Checchia SL, Cohen C, Giora TS. Evaluation of the results from arthroscopic surgical treatment of rotator cuff injuries in patients aged 65 years and over. Rev Bras Ortop 2015; 50 (03) 305-311
  • 24 Gilotra M, O'Brien MJ, Savoie 3rd. FH. Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Indication and Technique. Instr Course Lect 2016; 65: 83-92
  • 25 Lazarides AL, Alentorn-Geli E, Choi JH. et al. Rotator cuff tears in young patients: a different disease than rotator cuff tears in elderly patients. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2015; 24 (11) 1834-1843
  • 26 McElvany MD, McGoldrick E, Gee AO, Neradilek MB, Matsen 3rd. FA. Rotator cuff repair: published evidence on factors associated with repair integrity and clinical outcome. Am J Sports Med 2015; 43 (02) 491-500
  • 27 Meier SW, Meier JD. The effect of double-row fixation on initial repair strength in rotator cuff repair: a biomechanical study. Arthroscopy 2006; 22 (11) 1168-1173
  • 28 Smith CD, Alexander S, Hill AM. et al. A biomechanical comparison of single and double-row fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (11) 2425-2431
  • 29 Tudisco C, Bisicchia S, Savarese E. et al. Single-row vs. double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: clinical and 3 Tesla MR arthrography results. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2013; 14: 43
  • 30 Shen C, Tang ZH, Hu JZ, Zou GY, Xiao RC. Incidence of retear with double-row versus single-row rotator cuff repair. Orthopedics 2014; 37 (11) e1006-e1013
  • 31 Ma HL, Chiang ER, Wu HT. et al. Clinical outcome and imaging of arthroscopic single-row and double-row rotator cuff repair: a prospective randomized trial. Arthroscopy 2012; 28 (01) 16-24
  • 32 Nho SJ, Brown BS, Lyman S, Adler RS, Altchek DW, MacGillivray JD. Prospective analysis of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: prognostic factors affecting clinical and ultrasound outcome. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009; 18 (01) 13-20
  • 33 Bedeir YH, Jimenez AE, Grawe BM. Recurrent tears of the rotator cuff: Effect of repair technique and management options. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 2018; 10 (02) 7593
  • 34 Schmidt CC, Jarrett CD, Brown BT. Management of rotator cuff tears. J Hand Surg Am 2015; 40 (02) 399-408