Bioaugmentation demonstrates similar outcomes and failure rates for arthroscopic revision rotator cuff repair compared to revision without bioaugmentation

Abstract

IntroductionArthroscopic revision rotator cuff repairs exhibit lower healing rates and inferior outcomes compared to primary repairs. There is limited evidence regarding the use of bioaugmentation in the setting of revision rotator cuff repairs. Autologous conditioned plasma (ACP) is a promising adjunct that has been shown to improve healing rates and patient report outcomes in the primary setting. In addition, bioinductive patches such as collagen bovine patches have become a popular adjunct for stimulating healing in the primary setting. The aim of this study is to assess the outcomes after use of ACP and collagen bovine patch augmentation for revision arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. We hypothesized improved patient report outcomes and higher healing rates would be observed with bioaugmentation for revision repair compared to without. MethodsThis was an IRB approved, retrospective case-control study from two fellowship-trained surgeons that included all consecutive patients undergoing arthroscopic revision rotator cuff repair from 2010 to 2021. Reconstruction such as superior capsular reconstruction, partial revision repair, and less than one year follow-up were excluded. The bioaugmentation cohort received ACP and/or collagen bovine patch at the time of revision repair. Patient reported outcomes were collected from all patients including: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Assessment Form (ASES), visual analog scale for pain (VAS), Brophy score, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) mental and physical scores. Failure of revision rotator cuff repair was defined as an ASES postoperative total score less than 60 or a symptomatic re-tear confirmed on MRI. Students T-test was used for all comparisons of continuous variables. Chi-squared used for comparison of all categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at <0.05. ResultsThirty-eight patients met inclusion criteria with average follow-up of 3.5±1.7 years. There was no significant difference in follow-up between patients with and without bioaugmentation. Of the 38 patients, 14 patients met failure criteria. There was no significant difference in the rate of failure between the bioaugmentation cohort (6/19, 31.6%) versus patients who did not receive bioaugmentation (8/19, 42.1%), p=0.74) In addition, no significant differences were identified for ASES (64.6±20.1 versus 57.5±17.2, p=0.32), Brophy (6.4±5.2 versus 6.0±4.1, p=0.84), PROMIS Mental (13.4±3.9 versus 11.7±3.2) or PROMIS Physical (12.8±3.1 versus 11.9±3.2) scores between the bioaugmentation versus no bioaugmentation groups. ConclusionsBioaugmentation with a bioinductive collagen patch or autologous conditioned plasma demonstrated similar failure and patient reported outcomes compared to without bioaugmentation in the setting of revision rotator cuff repair.