Superior capsular reconstruction vs. Latissimus dorsi transfer for posterosuperior irreparable rotator cuff tears without arthritic change: Mid-term Crossover study

IF 1.5 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS

Journal of orthopaedics Pub Date : 2025-01-17 DOI:10.1016/j.jor.2025.01.013

Chang Hee Baek, Chaemoon Lim, Jung Gon Kim, Bo Taek Kim, Seung Jin Kim

{"title":"Superior capsular reconstruction vs. Latissimus dorsi transfer for posterosuperior irreparable rotator cuff tears without arthritic change: Mid-term Crossover study","authors":"Chang Hee Baek, Chaemoon Lim, Jung Gon Kim, Bo Taek Kim, Seung Jin Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.jor.2025.01.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Latissimus dorsi transfer (LDT) is a well-known tendon-transfer technique with long-term clinical follow-up results, whereas superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) has recently emerged as a treatment option for posterosuperior irreparable rotator cuff tears (PSIRCTs). However, only a few small short-term comparative studies have evaluated SCR and LDT. We evaluated the clinical and radiological outcomes of SCR and LDT in PSIRCTs without arthritic changes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This retrospective clinical comparative study evaluated patients who underwent SCR or LDT for PSIRCTs and had a mid-term (at least 5 years) follow-up. 28 patients in the SCR group and 31 in the LDT group were included. The visual analog scale (VAS) score, patient-reported clinical outcome scores, and active range of motion (aROM) were used for assessing clinical outcomes. The radiologic outcomes including progression of glenohumeral osteoarthritis and graft integrity were evaluated using Hamada grade and Sugaya classification, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Significant improvements in VAS scores and aROM were observed in both groups. The LDT group reported significant improvements in all patient-reported outcome scores. However, SCR group showed no significant improvement in patient-reported outcome scores except for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score. In radiologic outcomes, AHD was significantly decreased, and the Hamada grade was significantly increased postoperatively in both groups. Moreover, the progression of arthritic change was significantly greater in the LDT group, while the rate of graft retear was markedly higher in the SCR group.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Although both SCR and LDT improved clinical outcomes, LDT was superior to SCR in terms of patient-reported outcome scores. However, progression of osteoarthritis is more common in LDT whereas graft retear is more common in SCR. Therefore, SCR or LDT could be considered as a surgical treatment in PSIRCTs without arthritic changes, but clinical outcomes as well as complications (osteoarthritis and graft re-tear) must be considered.</div></div><div><h3>Level of evidence</h3><div>Level of evidence, III.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16633,"journal":{"name":"Journal of orthopaedics","volume":"69 ","pages":"Pages 10-17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X25000133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Latissimus dorsi transfer (LDT) is a well-known tendon-transfer technique with long-term clinical follow-up results, whereas superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) has recently emerged as a treatment option for posterosuperior irreparable rotator cuff tears (PSIRCTs). However, only a few small short-term comparative studies have evaluated SCR and LDT. We evaluated the clinical and radiological outcomes of SCR and LDT in PSIRCTs without arthritic changes.

Methods

This retrospective clinical comparative study evaluated patients who underwent SCR or LDT for PSIRCTs and had a mid-term (at least 5 years) follow-up. 28 patients in the SCR group and 31 in the LDT group were included. The visual analog scale (VAS) score, patient-reported clinical outcome scores, and active range of motion (aROM) were used for assessing clinical outcomes. The radiologic outcomes including progression of glenohumeral osteoarthritis and graft integrity were evaluated using Hamada grade and Sugaya classification, respectively.

Results

Significant improvements in VAS scores and aROM were observed in both groups. The LDT group reported significant improvements in all patient-reported outcome scores. However, SCR group showed no significant improvement in patient-reported outcome scores except for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score. In radiologic outcomes, AHD was significantly decreased, and the Hamada grade was significantly increased postoperatively in both groups. Moreover, the progression of arthritic change was significantly greater in the LDT group, while the rate of graft retear was markedly higher in the SCR group.

Conclusions

Although both SCR and LDT improved clinical outcomes, LDT was superior to SCR in terms of patient-reported outcome scores. However, progression of osteoarthritis is more common in LDT whereas graft retear is more common in SCR. Therefore, SCR or LDT could be considered as a surgical treatment in PSIRCTs without arthritic changes, but clinical outcomes as well as complications (osteoarthritis and graft re-tear) must be considered.

Level of evidence

Level of evidence, III.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of orthopaedics ORTHOPEDICS-

CiteScore

3.50

自引率

6.70%

发文量

202

审稿时长

56 days

期刊介绍： Journal of Orthopaedics aims to be a leading journal in orthopaedics and contribute towards the improvement of quality of orthopedic health care. The journal publishes original research work and review articles related to different aspects of orthopaedics including Arthroplasty, Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, Trauma, Spine and Spinal deformities, Pediatric orthopaedics, limb reconstruction procedures, hand surgery, and orthopaedic oncology. It also publishes articles on continuing education, health-related information, case reports and letters to the editor. It is requested to note that the journal has an international readership and all submissions should be aimed at specifying something about the setting in which the work was conducted. Authors must also provide any specific reasons for the research and also provide an elaborate description of the results.