header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

A RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING MINI-OPEN TO OPEN ROTATOR CUFF REPAIR



Abstract

This randomized clinical trial utilizing the validated rotator cuff disease specific quality of life outcome measure (RC-QOL) and adequate power demonstrates no difference in outcome for full thickness rotator cuff tears comparing open to mini-open surgical techniques.

The purpose of the study was to compare standard open rotator cuff repair versus mini-open rotator cuff repair by measuring the disease specific quality of life in patients with rotator cuff injury.

This randomized clinical trial utilizing a validated disease specific outcome measure and adequate power demonstrates no difference in outcome for full thickness rotator cuff tears comparing open to mini-open surgical techniques.

The miniopen approach utilizing an arthroscoic acromioplasty provides no additional beneifit to the patient undergoing a rotator cuff repair.

The mean one year RC-QOL score for the open and mini-open groups were 85.3 (SD = 15.6) and 87.4 (SD = 12.0) out of a maximum of one hundred, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.572).

Seventy-two patients (forty-eight males/twenty-four females) with an average age of 56.4 years (thirty-three to eighty-two years) consented to participate in the study. Inclusion criteria involved: unremitting pain, failed conservative treatment of at least three months, weakness of rotator cuff, and positive diagnostic imaging indicating a full-thickness rotator cuff tear. Massive rotator cuff tears were excluded.

Prior to surgery, patients were randomized to either open or mini-open rotator cuff repair. Patients were assessed and outcomes were collected at three, six and twelve months after surgery. Primary Outcome Measure: Patient quality of life was quantified using the validated disease specific, reliable and responsive Rotator Cuff Quality of Life Questionnaire (RC-QOL) measured on a one hundred point visual analogue scale format. Secondary Outcomes: Range of motion, strength, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score, and the Shoulder Rating Questionnaire.

Correspondence should be addressed to Cynthia Vezina, Communications Manager, COA, 4150-360 Ste. Catherine St. West, Westmount, QC H3Z 2Y5, Canada