Clinical and functional outcomes of a novel transosseous device to treat rotator cuff tears: A minimum 2-year follow-up.

Abstract

Despite the improvements in the repair equipment techniques of rotator cuff, a gold standard method has not been defined yet and transosseous fixation through deltoid-splitting (mini-open) approach is still regarded as a good option. The primary purpose of this study is to present satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes with a novel transosseous device in full-thickness rotator cuff tear through deltoid-splitting. This retrospective study was performed on 70 consecutive patients who underwent surgery by a single surgeon from June 2014 to June 2016 for a full-thickness rotator cuff tear and was managed with a novel transosseous device. Total number of patients, mean age, percentage of male and female patients, mean duration of follow-up, percentage of involvement of the dominant extremity, affected shoulder, and tear size were recorded. Functional and clinical outcomes were assessed baseline and postoperatively at 3 and 6 months and final follow-up using Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (Q-DASH) and Constant-Murley scores. A total of 70 (49 (70%) female, 21 (30%) male) patients whose mean age was 58.66 ± 9.19 (38-77) years were included. The mean surgery time was 35.33 ± 5.34 (28-55) min. The mean follow-up time was 28.31 ± 3.03 (24-36) months. According to the DeOrio and Cofield classification, 15 (21.43%) tears were small, 33 (47.14%) medium, 16 (22.86%) large, and 6 (8.57%) massive. By the final follow-up, the mean Constant-Murley score had significantly improved from 27.67 ± 7.46 (13-41) to 81.25 ± 3.77 (74-87; p = 0.0001) and the Q-DASH score had decreased from 82.34 ± 10.37 (65.91-100) to 10.28 ± 6.88 (0-23.45; p = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the Constant-Murley or Q-DASH score at baseline-final follow-up between the small, medium, large, and massive tear groups (p > 0.05). Treatment of full-thickness rotator cuff tear using this novel transosseous device significantly improved functional and clinical scores. However, further long-term prospective randomized multicenter trials involving comparative studies are necessary to confirm these findings.