Search

Background: This study’s purpose was to investigate the extent to which differences among operating surgeons may influence 1-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (RCR) surgery, after controlling for general and disease-specific patient factors. We hypothesized that surgeon would be additionally associated with 1-year PROMs, specifically the baseline to 1-year improvement in Penn Shoulder Score (PSS). Methods: We used mixed multivariable statistical modeling to assess the influence of surgeon (and alternatively surgical case volume) on 1-year PSS improvement in patients undergoing RCR at a single health system in 2018, controlling for eight patient- and six disease-specific preoperative factors as possible confounders. Contributions of predictors to explaining variation in 1-year PSS improvement were measured and compared using Akaike’s Information Criterion. Results: 518 cases performed by 28 surgeons met inclusion criteria, with median (quartiles) baseline PSS of 41.9 (31.9, 53.9) and 1-year PSS improvement of 42 (29.1, 55.3) points. Contrary to expectation, surgeon and surgical case volume were neither statistically significantly nor clinically meaningfully associated with 1-year PSS improvement. Baseline PSS and mental health status (VR-12 MCS) were the dominant and only statistically significant predictors of 1-year PSS improvement, with lower baseline PSS and higher VR-12 MCS predicting larger 1-year PSS improvement. Conclusion: Patients generally reported excellent 1-year outcomes following primary RCR. This study did not find evidence that the individual surgeon or surgeon case volume influences 1-year PROMs, independently of case-mix factors, following primary RCR in a large employed hospital system.

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based rotator cuff assessment is often qualitative and subjective; few studies have tried to validate such preoperative assessments. This study investigates relationships of preoperative MRI assessments made by conventional approaches to intraoperative findings of tear type, location, and size or MRI-assessed muscle occupation ratio. Methods: Intraoperatively, surgeons assessed tear type, location, anterior-posterior (AP) width, and medial-lateral length in 102 rotator cuff repair patients. Two musculoskeletal radiologists independently assessed the preoperative MRI scans for these same parameters and supraspinatus muscle atrophy by both Warner classification and quantitative occupation ratio. Exact agreement proportions, kappa statistics, and correlation coefficients were used to quantify agreement relationships. Results: Agreement between MRI readers’ and surgeons’ observations of tear status averaged 93% with κ = 0.38, and that of tear location averaged 77% with κ = 0.50. Concordance correlations of MRI and intraoperative measures of anterior-posterior and medial-lateral tear length averaged 0.59 and 0.56 across readers, respectively. Despite excellent interrater agreement on Warner classification (exact agreement proportion 0.91) and occupation ratio (concordance correlation 0.93) separately, correlations between these 2 measures were −0.54 and −0.64 for the 2 readers, respectively. Patients with Warner grade 0 had occupation ratios ranging from 0.5 to 1.5. Conclusion: Correlations of preoperative MRI tear dimensions and muscle atrophy assessed by conventional approaches with intraoperatively measured tear dimensions and quantitative occupation ratio, respectively, were only fair. Since tear size and muscle atrophy are known strong predictors of outcomes following rotator cuff repair that may influence treatment decisions, surgeons need to be aware of the limitations of MRI methods. Continued development and validation of quantitative preoperative imaging methods to accurately assess these parameters are needed to improve surgical planning and prognosis.