Search

The optimal management for massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs) without osteoarthritis (OA) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) vs. rotator cuff repair (RCR) in patients with MRCTs without OA.We conducted a retrospective data analysis of 68 patients treated for MRCTs via RSA and 215 patients treated for MRCTs via arthroscopic RCR between January 2014 and April 2019. Through propensity score matching, patients were matched for sex, age, tear size, and global fatty degeneration index. Thirty-nine patients in each group were included, and all patients had completed minimal 2-year follow-up. Postoperative radiologic evaluations of healing failure were performed. The visual analog scale score for pain, range of motion, and functional outcome measures including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, QuickDASH (short version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire) score, Simple Shoulder Test score, and Constant score were assessed and compared between the 2 groups.Healing failure was observed in 10 patients in the RCR group (32.3%). No statistically significant differences in preoperative range of motion and functional scores were found between the RCR and RSA groups. Both groups showed significant pain relief and functional improvement at final follow-up. Patients in the RCR group showed significantly greater forward elevation (156.4° ± 23.8° vs. 139.7° ± 22.4°, P .001) and internal rotation (thoracic vertebra, T8.2 ± 1.2 vs. T9.7 ± 2.6, P = .001). The average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 88.3 ± 12.2 in the RCR group and 81.8 ± 16.1 in the RSA group (P = .045). The QuickDASH score was significantly higher in the RCR group (P = .019). A significantly higher Simple Shoulder Test score (9.7 ± 2.8 vs. 8.1 ± 3.0, P = .01) and a significantly higher Constant score (67.2 ± 6.5 vs. 63.2 ± 7.1, P = .011) were seen in the RCR group.Both RSA and RCR are effective and reliable treatment options for MRCTs without OA. However, the RCR group showed better shoulder function improvement than the RSA group. Considering the possible implications of RSA, RCR should be referred to as a first-line treatment option for patients with MRCTs without OA with proper indications.

BACKGROUND A decreased acromiohumeral distance (AHD) is commonly detected in patients with massive rotator cuff tears (mRCTs). Most studies evaluating fixed humeral elevation have used preoperative or postoperative standardized radiography and not stress radiography. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive role of the preoperative AHD measured using stress radiography (AHD_stress) in rotator cuff healing and function after arthroscopic repair of mRCTs. METHODS The data of 113 patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of mRCTs were analyzed. Postoperative cuff integrity was evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging at 1 year, and shoulder function was evaluated at a mean of 34.9 ± 17.8 months (range, 24-92 months) postoperatively. Forty-seven patients showed healing failure. Propensity score matching (1-1) was performed between the healed group and healing failure group. Thirty-eight patients in each group were matched in the final analysis. The AHD and AHD_stress were defined as the shortest distances from the inferior acromion to the superior humerus on standard anteroposterior radiography and stress radiography (5.4-kg weight applied inferiorly in a neutral position), respectively. The AHD difference (AHD_diff) was defined as the difference between the AHD and AHD_stress values. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to determine cutoff values for significant variables. RESULTS No difference in the mean preoperative AHD was found between the healed group (7.5 ± 2.0 mm) and healing failure group (6.9 ± 2.2 mm, P = .234). The AHD_diff value was significantly higher in the healed group (4.4 ± 2.1 mm) than in the healing failure group (3.0 ± 2.0 mm, P = .002; cutoff, 3.2 mm). Patients with an AHD_diff value ≥ 3.2 mm showed a lower healing failure rate (28.9% vs. 71.1%, P < .001) and higher functional scores than patients with an AHD_diff value < 3.2 mm. The AHD_diff value was higher in patients with an American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score ≥ 80 (4.9 ± 1.9 mm) than in those with an ASES score < 80 (3.1 ± 2.1 mm, P = .024). Among patients with healing failure, only the postoperative AHD showed a significant difference between those with an ASES score ≥ 80 (7.0 ± 2.5 mm) and those with an ASES score < 80 (4.8 ± 2.1 mm, P = .009; cutoff, 4.8 mm). CONCLUSION A reducible AHD, which increased by ≥ 3.2 mm under stress radiography, can be a favorable predictor of rotator cuff healing and function after arthroscopic repair of mRCTs. Our findings suggest that this new and simple radiologic parameter should be considered preoperatively and would be helpful to determine appropriate treatment strategies.