Abstract
Original text for job: Arthroscopic versus open rotator cuff repair. A comparison of early clinical outcome.
Objective: To compare surgical invasiveness and early clinical outcome of arthroscopic and open rotator cuff repair.
Methods: Twenty-two patients who had undergone arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and twenty patients who had open repair were evaluated retrospectively. Both groups were comparable in age, gender, duration of symptoms, and size of rotator cuff tear. Comparisons included surgical time, duration of immobilization, duration of hospitalization as well as preoperative and postoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. Range of motion in active forward flexion was also compared at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively.
Results: The mean surgical time was significantly longer in the arthroscopic group compared to the open group. On the contrary, duration of immobilization and hospitalization was shorter in the arthroscopic group. Mean preoperative JOA was 72.1 in the arthroscopic repair group and 72.5 in the open group. JOA score improved to 95.2 in the arthroscopic group and 92.6 in the open group at 12 months after surgery. JOA score had improved postoperatively in both groups but no significant difference was noted between the groups. The arthroscopic group showed a slightly more rapid recovery in active flexion, however, there were no significant differences in functional outcome.
Conclusion: Functional recovery tends to be rapid in arthroscopic repair. No significant differences in the JOA score were noted at 12 months postoperatively. Although arthroscopic repairs in this study included the beginning of the learning curve, clinical outcome was comparable to that of open repairs. Our results are encouraging for continuing to perform arthroscopic cuff repair.
