Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of immediate rotator cuff repair with capsular release and those of rotator cuff repair after the stiffness was treated with rehabilitative therapy. Methods: Between June 2007 and December 2010, we recruited 63 patients with rotator cuff tears and stiffness. In 33 patients arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was performed with capsular release simultaneously (group I). In 30 patients arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was performed after 6 months of preoperative rehabilitation for stiffness (group II). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test score, Constant score, and visual analog scale score for pain and range of motion (ROM) were assessed at the start of the study; at 3, 6, and 12 months; and at the last visit. The postoperative cuff tendon integrity was assessed between 6 and 12 months using magnetic resonance or ultrasound images. Results: There were no significant differences in preoperative demographic data between the groups (P >.05). The mean follow-up period was 21.54 months. After treatment, there was significant improvement in ROM and functional scores in both groups, as measured at the last follow-up (P <.05). No statistical differences were found in clinical scores and ROM at the last followup (P >.05). On assessment of the magnetic resonance or ultrasound images taken 6 to 12 months postoperatively, the retear rate for the repaired cuff tendon in each group was 12.1% in group I and 13.4% in group II. Conclusions: In the treatment of rotator cuff tears with stiffness, satisfactory results can be achieved either by repairing the tear with simultaneous capsular release or by waiting to perform the repair after preoperative rehabilitation for stiffness. Because a delayed rotator cuff repair after improving ROM offered no clear advantage over an immediate operation, we recommend surgically treating rotator cuff tears with concomitant stiffness early using a simultaneous capsular release method to save time and to avoid unnecessary rehabilitation. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative study.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 197-204 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery |
Volume | 31 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2015 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:Supported by Wonkwang University . The authors report that they have no conflicts of interest in the authorship and publication of this article.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 by the Arthroscopy Association of North Americaa.