Is there a difference in clinical outcomes and repair integrity between arthroscopic single-row versus transosseous (anchorless) fixation? A retrospective comparative study

Abstract

BackgroundFew studies have investigated clinical and structural outcomes after transosseous (TO) repair. The purpose of this study was to compare structural and clinical outcomes of rotator cuff tear, repaired arthroscopically, with a single row (SR) or transossoeus (TO) anchorless technique. Methods96 patients who underwent an arthroscopic repair for superior or posterosuperior rotator cuff tear using TO (n:54) or a SR (n:42) were retrospectively enrolled in this study after evaluation of clinical and surgical notes. Functional evaluation was performed with the adjusted Constant score, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. Postoperative cuff integrity was determined through MRI study. ResultsPatients were recalled after a minimum follow-up of two years. All the patients were available for the study. In the SR group the Constant rating system showed a significant improvement from a preoperative average rating of 44.8 to an average of 85.7. In the group of TO repair the Constant rating system showed a significant improvement from a preoperative average of 46.1 to an average of 87.6 postoperatively. According to ASES index scores, the average total score improved from 42.8 to 92.0 in the anchor group and from 40.4 to 94.6 in the TO group. There was no statistical difference between the two groups about clinical outcomes. Postoperative MRI revealed no differences in term of complete re-tears between the two techniques. In the SR group at MRI we observe significant more cases of rotator cuff with a Sugaya type III healing. ConclusionsArthroscopic rotator cuff repair yielded successful clinical outcomes using SR and TO technique. However using the TO technique we saw less type 3 Sugaya readings on MRI suggesting a possible benefit with TO repair. Level of evidence IIRetrospective study.