Comparison of three suture-bridge techniques for large or massive rotator cuff tear with delamination

• Main Authors: Okubo Atsushi, Yotsumoto Tadahiko, Watanabe Nobuyoshi, Kajikawa Teruyoshi, Nakajima Shun, Oshima Yasushi, Iizawa Norishige, Majima Tokifumi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: EDP Sciences 2021-01-01
• Series: SICOT-J
• Subjects: rotator cuff tear; delamination; suture-bridge; en masse repair; double-layer repair
• Online Access: https://www.sicot-j.org/articles/sicotj/full_html/2021/01/sicotj210030/sicotj210030.html

Introduction: Rotator cuff tear with delamination is considered a risk factor for postoperative retear. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between three repair procedures for large or massive rotator cuff tears with delamination: conventional en masse suture bridge (EMSB), double-layer suture bridge (DLSB), and the combination of DLSB with modified Debyere-Patte (DLSB + DP). Methods: 53 shoulders of 52 patients who had massive rotator cuff tears with delamination were categorized into three groups: EMSB (18 shoulders), DLSB (24 shoulders), and DLSB + DP (11 shoulders). The mean postoperative follow-up period was 34.6 months. Pre- and postoperative evaluations included a range of motion (ROM), Constant scores, global fatty degeneration (GFDI), and tendon integrity according to Sugaya’s classification by magnetic resonance images (MRI). Results: In all groups, ROM significantly improved after the procedures. Mean constant scores significantly improved: from 45.5 to 77.4 after EMSB, from 45.5 to 87.6 after DLSB, and from 46.3 to 88.0 after DLSB + DP. Significant differences were noted in postoperative Constant scores (p = 0.018: DLSB vs. EMSB, and p = 0.045: DLSB + DP vs. EMSB). The Constant pain scores were better for DLSB + DP than for EMSB (p = 0.012). Global fatty degeneration index (GFDI) with DLSB + DP was significantly higher than that for either EMSB or DLSB, indicating significant preoperative fatty degeneration for DLSB + DP. Retear occurred in 27.8% of the EMSB group, 12.5% of the DLSB group, and 9.1% of the DLSB + DP group. Discussion: Comparisons of the three groups demonstrated that DLSB and DLSB + DP achieved better clinical outcomes than EMSB for the repair of large or massive rotator cuff tears. DLSB + DP is useful for massive rotator cuff tears with severe fatty degeneration or for cases where the presence of excessive tension is anticipated when repairing the torn cuff.