Clinical outcomes of rotator cuff repair in patients with concomitant glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

Abstract

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA) is a common comorbidity in patients with rotator cuff tears. However, the efficacy of rotator cuff repair in patients with concomitant glenohumeral OA is still heavily debated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and functional outcome measures following arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs in patients with concomitant glenohumeral OA vs. those without glenohumeral OA. A retrospective review of 206 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic supraspinatus repairs (both isolated and with accompanying infraspinatus and/or subscapularis involvement) between 2013 and 2018 with a minimum of 1-year follow-up was performed. Patients were separated into 2 groups based on the presence or absence of concomitant glenohumeral OA. The primary outcome was failure of repair, defined as the need for revision repair or a retear confirmed on postoperative magnetic resonance imaging. The secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcome measures including the visual analog scale pain score, Subjective Shoulder Value, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score; active range of motion (ROM); and strength testing. Within the OA cohort, a subgroup analysis was conducted to compare outcomes between patients with mild OA and patients with moderate to severe OA. There were 91 patients in the glenohumeral OA group and 115 patients in the control group. Significant differences in postoperative forward flexion (FF) ROM (153.55° ± 21.07° vs. 160.14° ± 17.26°, P = .001) and external rotation (ER) ROM (46.91° ± 11.95° vs. 52.25° ± 11.60°, P = .001) were observed between the glenohumeral OA and control groups. There were no significant differences between groups in revision repairs, retears, postoperative internal rotation ROM, all preoperative ROMs, all patient-reported outcome measures, and all strength parameters (all P > .05). For the subgroup analysis, there were 70 patients in the mild OA group and 21 patients in the moderate to severe OA group. We found a significant difference in postoperative FF strength (88.4% vs. 61.9% with 5 of 5 strength, P = .010) and ER strength (89.9% vs. 71.4% with 5 of 5 strength, P = .046) between the mild OA group and moderate to severe OA group. There were no significant differences between the groups in all other outcome measures. Rotator cuff repair remains an excellent treatment option in patients with concomitant glenohumeral OA. The data in this study demonstrate that rotator cuff repairs in patients with concomitant glenohumeral OA have similar clinical and functional outcomes to repairs in patients without OA with the exception of slightly decreased postoperative FF and ER ROM. Patients with moderate to severe OA may have slightly decreased FF and ER strength outcomes compared with patients with mild OA.