It was a great pleasure to read the letter by Drs. Li and Yu. They had a question regarding the patients included in the study and, specifically, Table 1. After looking at Table 1 with scrutiny, it has come to our attention that the numbers of patients in the individual studies were mixed when transferring the numbers into table format. Although we apologize for the confusion that this has caused the readers of our study, we do stand by our final conclusion that there are no differences between single- and double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs.We have also addressed the limitation in our study within the context of the article. Drs. Li and Yu raised the point regarding retears after repair being an important issue and quoted a rate of 94.4%. This figure may be the upper limit, with other studies showing a lower percentage. Nevertheless, our article did not look at retears as an outcome. Retears are a problem after rotator cuff repair, and although there is some evidence that double-row repair may be better in terms of massive rotator cuff tears with lower retear rates postoperatively, this also remains an area of controversy, with more studies being needed.We look forward to reading the meta-analysis of Drs. Li and Yu and looking at their results, which indicate that double-row repair has an advantage regarding retears postoperatively. It was a great pleasure to read the letter by Drs. Li and Yu. They had a question regarding the patients included in the study and, specifically, Table 1. After looking at Table 1 with scrutiny, it has come to our attention that the numbers of patients in the individual studies were mixed when transferring the numbers into table format. Although we apologize for the confusion that this has caused the readers of our study, we do stand by our final conclusion that there are no differences between single- and double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs. We have also addressed the limitation in our study within the context of the article. Drs. Li and Yu raised the point regarding retears after repair being an important issue and quoted a rate of 94.4%. This figure may be the upper limit, with other studies showing a lower percentage. Nevertheless, our article did not look at retears as an outcome. Retears are a problem after rotator cuff repair, and although there is some evidence that double-row repair may be better in terms of massive rotator cuff tears with lower retear rates postoperatively, this also remains an area of controversy, with more studies being needed. We look forward to reading the meta-analysis of Drs. Li and Yu and looking at their results, which indicate that double-row repair has an advantage regarding retears postoperatively. Arthroscopic Double-Row Rotator Cuff Repair: Is It the Same as Single-Row Repair Regarding Clinical Outcomes?ArthroscopyVol. 29Issue 9PreviewAlthough many studies have proven the biomechanical advantage of arthroscopic double-row anchor fixation for rotator cuff tears,1,2 the translation into clinical outcomes is hard to observe. Thus, whether double-row repair is superior to single-row repair in clinical terms remains a controversy. In addition, with the prevalence of evidence-based medicine, an exact result derived from the highest level of evidence has been considered the gold standard to evaluate a new technique. Full-Text PDF