Skip to main content

Ultrasonic evaluation of the repair integrity can predict functional outcomes after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy volume 23, pages 376–385 (2015)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

Despite proven accuracy of US for the evaluation of rotator cuff integrity, there is no US-based classification for this purpose. This study aimed to assess US for the evaluation of rotator cuff repair integrity in accordance with a well-established MRI classification.

Methods

The authors retrospectively reviewed 257 patients who underwent arthroscopic double-row suture anchor repair for rotator cuff tears. Post-operative function was rated using the Constant score, the UCLA rating and the SSV, whereas repair integrity was assessed using US as described in the MRI classification of Sugaya et al.

Results

A total of 212 patients aged 55.6 ± 9.8 years had complete functional and radiographic assessments at a mean follow-up of 36.8 ± 11.6 months. Using all three ratings, repairs of Type I had highest scores, repairs of Type II had discernibly lower scores, whereas repairs of Types III, IV and V had similar intermediate scores.

Conclusion

Comparison of the UCLA scores with those of Sugaya et al. revealed similar scores for repairs of Type I and of Type V. The scores are less comparable for repairs of Types II, III and IV, because US does not allow identification of partial tears if shielded by bony structures and because partial tears correspond to minimal impairment. The study reveals that US is an adequate imaging modality to classify rotator cuff repair integrity, which could reduce economic and practical burdens of CTA, MRI or MRA. The results also confirm that post-operative repair integrity and functional outcome depend on pre-operative tear size and fatty infiltration, which provides clinicians with reasoning for early surgical repair and warning of the risks of strenuous activity for patients with larger tears.

Level of evidence

Prognostic study, Level IV.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Boileau P, Brassart N, Watkinson DJ, Carles M, Hatzidakis AM, Krishnan SG (2005) Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness tears of the supraspinatus: Does the tendon really heal? J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(6):1229–1240

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Boyer P, Bouthors C, Delcourt T, Stewart O, Hamida F, Mylle G, Massin P (2013) Arthroscopic double-row cuff repair with suture-bridging: a structural and functional comparison of two techniques. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-013-2401-7

    Google Scholar 

  3. Charousset C, Bellaiche L, Duranthon LD, Grimberg J (2005) Accuracy of CT arthrography in the assessment of tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87(6):824–828

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cofield RH (1982) Subscapular muscle transposition for repair of chronic rotator cuff tears. Surg Gynecol Obstet 154(5):667–672

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Constant CR, Gerber C, Emery RJ, Sojbjerg JO, Gohlke F, Boileau P (2008) A review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 17(2):355–361

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. de Jesus JO, Parker L, Frangos AJ, Nazarian LN (2009) Accuracy of MRI, MR arthrography, and ultrasound in the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears: a meta-analysis. Am J Roentgenol 192(6):1701–1707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ellman H, Hanker G, Bayer M (1986) Repair of the rotator cuff. End-result study of factors influencing reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am 68(8):1136–1144

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fealy S, Kingham TP, Altchek DW (2002) Mini-open rotator cuff repair using a two-row fixation technique: outcomes analysis in patients with small, moderate, and large rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy 18(6):665–670

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fuchs B, Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Gerber C (1999) Fatty degeneration of the muscles of the rotator cuff: assessment by computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 8(6):599–605

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Galatz LM, Ball CM, Teefey SA, Middleton WD, Yamaguchi K (2004) The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86(2):219–224

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gartsman GM (2001) Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res 390(390):95–106

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gazielly DF, Gleyze P, Montagnon C (1994) Functional and anatomical results after rotator cuff repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res 304:43–53

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gazzola S, Bleakney RR (2011) Current imaging of the rotator cuff. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 19(3):300–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gerber C, Fuchs B, Hodler J (2000) The results of repair of massive tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82(4):505–515

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gilbart MK, Gerber C (2007) Comparison of the subjective shoulder value and the Constant score. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16(6):717–721

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Goutallier D, Postel JM, Bernageau J, Lavau L, Voisin MC (1994) Fatty muscle degeneration in cuff ruptures. Pre- and postoperative evaluation by CT scan. Clin Orthop Relat Res 304(304):78–83

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Goutallier D, Postel JM, Gleyze P, Leguilloux P, Van Driessche S (2003) Influence of cuff muscle fatty degeneration on anatomic and functional outcomes after simple suture of full-thickness tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12(6):550–554

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gumina S, Campagna V, Ferrazza G, Giannicola G, Fratalocchi F, Milani A, Postacchini F (2012) Use of platelet–leukocyte membrane in arthroscopic repair of large rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(15):1345–1352

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Haneveld H, Hug K, Diederichs G, Scheibel M, Gerhardt C (2013) Arthroscopic double-row repair of the rotator cuff: a comparison of bio-absorbable and non-resorbable anchors regarding osseous reaction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(7):1647–1654

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Harryman DT, Mack LA, Wang KY, Jackins SE, Richardson ML, Matsen FA (1991) Repairs of the rotator cuff. Correlation of functional results with integrity of the cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 73(7):982–989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Imhoff AB, Hodler J (1996) Correlation of MR imaging, CT arthrography, and arthroscopy of the shoulder. Bull Hosp Joint Dis 54(3):146–152

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Jo CH, Shin JS (2013) Cross-sectional area of the supraspinatus muscle after rotator cuff repair: an anatomic measure of outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(19):1785–1791

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jost B, Pfirrmann CW, Gerber C, Switzerland Z (2000) Clinical outcome after structural failure of rotator cuff repairs. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82(3):304–314

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim JH, Hong IT, Ryu KJ, Bong ST, Lee YS, Kim JH (2014) Retear rate in the late postoperative period after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 42(11):2606–2613

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Knudsen HB, Gelineck J, Sojbjerg JO, Olsen BS, Johannsen HV, Sneppen O (1999) Functional and magnetic resonance imaging evaluation after single-tendon rotator cuff reconstruction. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 8(3):242–246

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lenza M, Buchbinder R, Takwoingi Y, Johnston R, Hanchard N, Faloppa F (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance arthrography and ultrasonography for assessing rotator cuff tears in people with shoulder pain for whom surgery is being considered. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9:1–139

    Google Scholar 

  28. Liu SH, Baker CL (1994) Arthroscopically assisted rotator cuff repair: correlation of functional results with integrity of the cuff. Arthroscopy 10(1):54–60

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lo IKY, Burkhart SS (2003) Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: re-establishing the footprint of the rotator cuff. Arthroscopy 19(9):1035–1042

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Melis B, DeFranco MJ, Chuinard C, Walch G (2010) Natural history of fatty infiltration and atrophy of the supraspinatus muscle in rotator cuff tears. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(6):1498–1505

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Millstein ES, Snyder SJ (2003) Arthroscopic evaluation and management of rotator cuff tears. Orthop Clin N Am 34(4):507–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Murphy RJ, Daines MT, Carr AJ, Rees JL (2013) An independent learning method for orthopaedic surgeons performing shoulder ultrasound to identify full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(3):266–272

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Oh JH, Kim JY, Choi JA, Kim WS (2010) Effectiveness of multidetector computed tomography arthrography for the diagnosis of shoulder pathology: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging with arthroscopic correlation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 19(1):14–20

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Park TS, Park DW, Kim SI, Kweon TH (2001) Roentgenographic assessment of acromial morphology using supraspinatus outlet radiographs. Arthroscopy 17(5):496–501

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pavic R, Margetic P, Bensic M, Brnadic RL (2013) Diagnostic value of US, MR and MR arthrography in shoulder instability. Injury 44(Suppl 3):S26–S32

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Prickett WD, Teefey SA, Galatz LM, Calfee RP, Middleton WD, Yamaguchi K (2003) Accuracy of ultrasound imaging of the rotator cuff in shoulders that are painful postoperatively. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(6):1084–1089

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Severud EL, Ruotolo C, Abbott DD, Nottage WM (2003) All-arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: a long-term retrospective outcome comparison. Arthroscopy 19(3):234–238

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Smith TO, Back T, Toms AP, Hing CB (2011) Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound for rotator cuff tears in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 66(11):1036–1048

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Strobel K, Hodler J, Meyer DC, Pfirrmann CW, Pirkl C, Zanetti M (2005) Fatty atrophy of supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles: accuracy of US. Radiology 237(2):584–589

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sugaya H, Maeda K, Matsuki K, Moriishi J (2005) Functional and structural outcome after arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair: single-row versus dual-row fixation. Arthroscopy 21(11):1307–1316

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sugaya H, Maeda K, Matsuki K, Moriishi J (2007) Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair. A prospective outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(5):953–960

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Thomazeau H, Boukobza E, Morcet N, Chaperon J, Langlais F (1997) Prediction of rotator cuff repair results by magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Orthop Relat Res 344:275–283

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Waltrip RL, Zheng N, Dugas JR, Andrews JR (2003) Rotator cuff repair. A biomechanical comparison of three techniques. Am J Sports Med 31(4):493–497

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Werthel JD, Pelissier A, Massin P, Boyer P, Valenti P (2014) Arthroscopic double row cuff repair with suture-bridging and autologous conditioned plasma injection: functional and structural results. Int J Shoulder Surg 8(4):101–106

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Worland RL, Arredondo J, Angles F, Lopez-Jimenez F (1999) Repair of massive rotator cuff tears in patients older than 70 years. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 8(1):26–30

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Centre Osteoarticulaire des Cèdres, Grenoble, France

    Johannes Barth & Elias Fotiadis

  2. Department of Radiology, Clinique du Mail, Grenoble, France

    Renaud Barthelemy

  3. Department of Medical Research, Alliance Scientifique SAS, Venon, France

    Sophie Genna & Mo Saffarini

  4. Department of Medical Technology, Accelerate Innovation Management SA, 1 rue de la Navigation, 1201, Geneva, Switzerland

    Mo Saffarini

Authors
  1. Johannes Barth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elias Fotiadis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Renaud Barthelemy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sophie Genna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mo Saffarini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mo Saffarini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barth, J., Fotiadis, E., Barthelemy, R. et al. Ultrasonic evaluation of the repair integrity can predict functional outcomes after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23, 376–385 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3505-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3505-z

Keywords

  • Rotator cuff
  • Re-tear
  • Ultrasonography
  • Double-row fixation
  • Sugaya classification