Latissimus dorsi transfer or lower trapezius transfer: a treatment algorithm for irreparable posterosuperior rotator cuff tears muscles transfers in posterosuperior rotator cuff tears

Abstract

IntroductionTendon transfers of the latissimus dorsi (LDT) or the lower trapezius (LTT) are treatment options for irreparable posterosuperior rotator cuff tears (PSIRCT). There is still no consensus on which type of tendon transfer is superior in the treatment of PSIRCT. Due to the differences in the anatomy and biomechanics, we hypothesize that there are different clinical situations in which either LDT or LTT should be preferred. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of LDT and LTT in patients with PSIRCT to establish a clinical algorithm for the treatment decision. Materials and MethodsThis is a retrospective, single center observational study. Included were patients who underwent arthroscopically assisted LDT (aaLDT) or arthroscopically assisted LTT (aaLTT) for PSIRCT. In all patients, range of motion (ROM), external rotation strength, Visual Analogue Scale of Pain (VAS) and Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV) were determined pre- and postoperatively. Constant-Murley Score (CS) was evaluated at final follow-up. Complication rate, failure of the tendon transfer and revision rate were analyzed. ResultsIn total, 29 aaLDT (age 64 years, median follow-up time 45 months) and 8 aaLTT (age 54 years, median follow-up time 34 months) were included. Active ROM, VAS and SSV was significantly improved in both cohorts. At follow-up, the median CS was 73 (aaLDT) and 77 (aaLTT), respectively. Failure rate including revision surgery was 14% (aaLDT) and 13% (aaLTT), respectively. Low functional findings preoperatively were correlated to a lower functional outcome at follow-up in both groups. Painful loss of anterior elevation (PLEA) and loss of ER had no significant impact on functional outcomes in aaLDT. ConclusionFollowing the treatment algorithm based on the clinical examination, clinical outcome parameters, active ROM and pain could be significantly improved. Good preoperative function was associated with a good clinical outcome in both transfers. A low failure and revision rate supports the good decision-making of the algorithm presented.