Arthroscopic transosseous anchorless rotator cuff repair reduces bone defects related to peri-implant cyst formation: a comparison with conventional suture anchors using propensity score matching.
Hyeon Jang Jeong, Ji Soo Lee, Young Kyu Kim, Sung-Min Rhee, Joo Han Oh
{"title":"Arthroscopic transosseous anchorless rotator cuff repair reduces bone defects related to peri-implant cyst formation: a comparison with conventional suture anchors using propensity score matching.","authors":"Hyeon Jang Jeong, Ji Soo Lee, Young Kyu Kim, Sung-Min Rhee, Joo Han Oh","doi":"10.5397/cise.2023.00052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The transosseous anchorless repair (ToR) technique was recently introduced to avoid suture anchor-related problems. While favorable outcomes of the ToR technique have been reported, no previous studies on peri-implant cyst formation with the ToR technique exist. Therefore, this study compared the clinical outcomes and prevalence of peri-implant cyst formation between the ToR technique and the conventional transosseous equivalent technique using suture anchors (SA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cases with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) between 2016 and 2018 treated with the double-row suture bridge technique were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into ToR and SA groups. To compare clinical outcomes, 19 ToR and 57 SA cases without intraoperative implant failure were selected using propensity score matching (PSM). While intraoperative implant failure rate was analyzed before PSM, retear rate, peri-implant cyst formation rate, and functional outcomes were compared after PSM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intraoperative implant failure rate (ToR, 8% vs. SA, 15.3%) and retear rate (ToR, 5.3% vs. SA, 19.3%) did not differ between the two groups (all P>0.05). However, peri-implant cysts were not observed in the ToR group, while they were observed in 16.7% of the SA group (P=0.008). Postoperative functional outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups (all P>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The ToR technique produced comparable clinical outcomes to conventional techniques. Considering the prospect of potential additional surgeries, the absence of peri-implant cyst formation might be an advantage of ToR. Furthermore, ToR might reduce the medical costs related to suture anchors and, thereby, could be a useful option for ARCR. Level of evidence: III.</p>","PeriodicalId":33981,"journal":{"name":"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/14/3d/cise-2023-00052.PMC10497926.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5397/cise.2023.00052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The transosseous anchorless repair (ToR) technique was recently introduced to avoid suture anchor-related problems. While favorable outcomes of the ToR technique have been reported, no previous studies on peri-implant cyst formation with the ToR technique exist. Therefore, this study compared the clinical outcomes and prevalence of peri-implant cyst formation between the ToR technique and the conventional transosseous equivalent technique using suture anchors (SA).
Methods: Cases with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) between 2016 and 2018 treated with the double-row suture bridge technique were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into ToR and SA groups. To compare clinical outcomes, 19 ToR and 57 SA cases without intraoperative implant failure were selected using propensity score matching (PSM). While intraoperative implant failure rate was analyzed before PSM, retear rate, peri-implant cyst formation rate, and functional outcomes were compared after PSM.
Results: The intraoperative implant failure rate (ToR, 8% vs. SA, 15.3%) and retear rate (ToR, 5.3% vs. SA, 19.3%) did not differ between the two groups (all P>0.05). However, peri-implant cysts were not observed in the ToR group, while they were observed in 16.7% of the SA group (P=0.008). Postoperative functional outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups (all P>0.05).
Conclusions: The ToR technique produced comparable clinical outcomes to conventional techniques. Considering the prospect of potential additional surgeries, the absence of peri-implant cyst formation might be an advantage of ToR. Furthermore, ToR might reduce the medical costs related to suture anchors and, thereby, could be a useful option for ARCR. Level of evidence: III.
背景:经骨锚定修复(ToR)技术最近被引入以避免缝合锚定相关的问题。虽然已有报道ToR技术的良好结果,但尚无使用ToR技术治疗种植体周围囊肿形成的研究。因此,本研究比较了ToR技术和传统的经骨等效技术使用缝合锚钉(SA)的临床结果和种植体周围囊肿形成的发生率。方法:回顾性分析2016 ~ 2018年关节镜下肩袖修复术(ARCR)中应用双排缝合桥技术的病例。患者分为ToR组和SA组。为了比较临床结果,使用倾向评分匹配(PSM)选择19例ToR和57例SA,无术中植入物失败。分析PSM前术中种植体失败率,比较PSM后的再撕裂率、种植体周围囊肿形成率和功能结果。结果:两组术中种植体失败率(ToR, 8% vs SA, 15.3%)和再入率(ToR, 5.3% vs SA, 19.3%)差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。ToR组未见种植体周围囊肿,SA组16.7%见种植体周围囊肿(P=0.008)。两组术后功能结局比较,差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论:ToR技术的临床效果与传统技术相当。考虑到潜在的其他手术的前景,没有种植体周围囊肿形成可能是ToR的优势。此外,ToR可能减少与缝合锚钉相关的医疗费用,因此可能是ARCR的有用选择。证据水平:III。