Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of long-term postoperative outcomes between mini-open and arthroscopic repair for isolated supraspinatus tears: a retrospective analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Despite arthroscopic repair of the rotator cuff is an increasingly popular procedure, the mini-open (MO) repair still remains a viable and appreciated technique. The purpose of the study was to analyze the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with isolated supraspinatus tear undergoing MO or arthroscopic surgery (AS) repair.

Patients and methods

Forty-six patients underwent supraspinatus repair with anchors: 24 with MO technique and 22 with AS procedure. They were evaluated postoperatively at 3, 6, 12 months and 2 years.

Results

The mean surgery time, the mean hospital stay and the average costs were shorter in the MO patients respect to the AS group. Despite an initial better Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Constant Murley Score in the first 6 months of follow-up in the AS group, no differences were detected at 24 months.

Conclusion

This study suggests that isolated supraspinatus tears can be treated with a MO or arthroscopic repair procedure with similar clinical outcome in the long-term postoperative period. The mean surgery time and the average costs are less in the MO group respect to the AS group.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Liu J, Fan L, Zhu Y et al (2017) Comparison of clinical outcomes in all-arthroscopic versus mini-open repair of rotator cuff tears. Medicine (USA) 96:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000006322

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Pearsall AW, Ibrahim KA, Madanagopal SG (2007) The results of arthroscopic versus mini-open repair for rotator cuff tears at mid-term follow-up. J Orthop Surg Res 2:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-2-24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Oliva F, Piccirilli E, Bossa M et al (2015) I.S.Mu.L.T—rotator cuff tears guidelines. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J 5:227–263. https://doi.org/10.11138/mltj/2015.5.4.227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baudi P, Dani ER, Campochiaro G et al (2013) The rotator cuff tear repair with a new arthroscopic transosseous system: the Sharc-FT®. Musculoskelet Surg 97:57–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-013-0254-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Merolla G, Chillemi C, Franceschini V et al (2014) Tendon transfer for irreparable rotator cuff tears: indications and surgical rationale. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J 4:425–432. https://doi.org/10.11138/mltj/2014.4.4.425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Patte D (1990) Classification of rotator cuff lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 254:81–86

    Google Scholar 

  7. Donohue NK, Prisco ARP, Grindel SI (2017) Pre-operative corticosteroid injections improve functional outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic repair of high-grade partial-thickness rotator cuff tears. Muscle Ligaments Tendons J 7:34. https://doi.org/10.11138/mltj/2017.7.1.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C et al (1996) Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and head). Am J Ind Med 29:602–608. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID-AJIM4>3.0.CO;2-L

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Constant CR, Murley AH (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 214:160–164

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ghodadra NS, Provencher MT, Verma NN et al (2009) Open, mini-open, and all-arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery: indications and implications for rehabilitation. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 39:81-A6. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2009.2918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cho C-H, Song K-S, Jung G-H et al (2012) Early postoperative outcomes between arthroscopic and mini-open repair for rotator cuff tears. Orthopedics 35:e1347–e1352. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20120822-20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. van der Zwaal P, Thomassen BJW, Nieuwenhuijse MJ et al (2013) Clinical outcome in all-arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair in small to medium-sized tears: a randomized controlled trial in 100 patients with 1-year follow-up. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg 29:266–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2012.08.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Verma NN, Dunn W, Adler RS et al (2006) All-arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: a retrospective review with minimum 2-year follow-up. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg 22:587–594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2006.01.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ji X, Bi C, Wang F, Wang Q (2015) Arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: an up-to-date meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg 31:118–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2014.08.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hui YJ, Teo AQA, Sharma S et al (2017) Immediate costs of mini-open versus arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in an Asian population. J Orthop Surg 25:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/2309499016684496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kasten P, Keil C, Grieser T et al (2011) Prospective randomised comparison of arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair of the supraspinatus tendon. Int Orthop 35:1663–1670. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-011-1262-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Churchill RS, Ghorai JK (2010) Total cost and operating room time comparison of rotator cuff repair techniques at low, intermediate, and high volume centers: mini-open versus all-arthroscopic. J Shoulder Elb Surg 19:716–721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.10.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Huang R, Wang S, Wang Y et al (2016) Systematic review of all-arthroscopic versus mini-open repair of rotator cuff tears: a meta-analysis. Sci Rep 6:22857. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep22857

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Morse K, Davis AD, Afra R et al (2008) Arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 36:1824–1828. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546508322903

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Verdano MA, Pellegrini A, Scita G et al (2013) Arthroscopic treatment for cuff tear: strength recovery at 12 months of follow-up. Musculoskelet Surg 97:51–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-013-0241-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Arrigoni P, Fossati C, Zottarelli L et al (2013) Functional repair in massive immobile rotator cuff tears leads to satisfactory quality of living: results at 3-year follow-up. Musculoskelet Surg 97:73–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-013-0252-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neuroscience and Organs of Sense, Orthopedics Section, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Bari, Policlinico, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, 70124, Bari, Italy

    G. Vicenti, L. Moretti, M. Carrozzo, V. Pesce, G. Solarino & B. Moretti

Authors
  1. G. Vicenti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Moretti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Carrozzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. V. Pesce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G. Solarino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. B. Moretti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Vicenti.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard

All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vicenti, G., Moretti, L., Carrozzo, M. et al. Evaluation of long-term postoperative outcomes between mini-open and arthroscopic repair for isolated supraspinatus tears: a retrospective analysis. Musculoskelet Surg 102 (Suppl 1), 21–27 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-018-0549-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-018-0549-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation