Single-row versus double-row arthroscopic repair in the treatment of rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomized clinical study

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with single-row and double-row techniques because research has demonstrated the superiority of double-row repair from a biological and mechanical point of view but there is no evidence of clinical superiority. Methods A total of 160 patients with a full-thickness rotator cuff tear underwent arthroscopic repair with suture anchors. They were randomised into two groups of 80 patients according to the repair technique: single-row (group 1) and double-row (group 2). Results were evaluated by use of the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Constant questionnaires, the Shoulder Strength Index (SSI) and range of motion. Follow-up time was two years. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were performed on each shoulder preoperatively and two years after repair. Results One hundred per cent of the patients were followed up. All measurements showed significant improvement compared with the preoperative status. The UCLA score showed significant improvement in group 2. In over 30-mm tears UCLA and ASES showed significant differences. SSI showed significant improvement in group 2. Range of motion showed significant improvements in flexion and abduction in group 2. In under 30-mm tears group 2 showed also significant improvement in internal and external rotation. In MRI studies there were no significant differences.Conclusions At two years follow-up the double-row repair technique showed a significant difference in clinical outcome compared with single-row repair and this was even more significative in over 30-mm tears. No MRI differences were observed.

Clinical and Structural Outcomes After Arthroscopic Repair of Full-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears With and Without Platelet-Rich Product Supplementation: A Meta-analysis and Meta-regression

“…46 2. As shown by Carbonel et al 47 and Park et al, 48 initial tear size may play a role in postoperative outcome scores after minimum 2-year follow-up. 31 Antuña et al 25 Jo et al 28 Jo et al 29 Randelli et al 21 Malavolta et al 30 Gumina et al 27 Castricini et al Jo et al 28 Jo et al 29 Rodeo et al 41 Jo et al 28 Jo et al 29 Randelli et al 21 Gumina 6.…”

Double-row rotator cuff repair yields improved tendon structural integrity, but no difference in clinical outcomes compared with single-row and triple-row repair: a systematic review

“…ASES and Constant scores were similar between SR and DR repairs; however, the results of postoperative UCLA scores demonstrated a statistically significant advantage in DR repairs compared with SR repairs. These data could be skewed by the larger effect size of Carbonel et al 8 data among the three cohorts in this subgroup (160/262 patients, 60.6%). In that study, tears were stratified by size (either 1–3 cm or >3 cm).…”

Is the arthroscopic modified tension band suture technique suitable for all full-thickness rotator cuff tears?

“…The retear rate in the small to medium tear group was similar to or lower than the rates with other suture techniques; however, in the large to massive tear group, a higher rate was noted. [2][3][4]6,9,11,13,17 Andres et al 1 reported the biomechanical properties of 5 different rotator cuff repair techniques (single row, double row, tension band, suture bridge, and double-row tension band). The tension band suture technique allows significantly higher contact pressure at the footprint than do the single-row and double-row repair techniques and offers higher pullout strength than do the single-row and suture bridge techniques.…”