No difference in 2-year outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients with osteoporosis.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Stephen J Sierra, Adam Lutz, Samantha A Piergiovanni, Ellen Shanley, Charles A Thigpen, Michael J Kissenberth, Stephan G Pill
{"title":"No difference in 2-year outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients with osteoporosis.","authors":"Stephen J Sierra, Adam Lutz, Samantha A Piergiovanni, Ellen Shanley, Charles A Thigpen, Michael J Kissenberth, Stephan G Pill","doi":"10.1016/j.jse.2025.02.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many prognostic factors associated with healing after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair have been evaluated. It has been shown from previous literature that osteoporosis is an independent risk factor for poor healing and increased need for revision surgery. To our knowledge, there has not been a study reporting patient reported outcomes (PROs) for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients with osteoporosis. The purpose of this study was to compare PROs of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) in patients with decreased bone mineral density to those with normal bone mineral density. We hypothesized that patients with decreased bone mineral density would have worse outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective chart review identified patients who had arthroscopic RCR with preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative PROs. Demographic data and rotator cuff tear size were recorded, and the PROs included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), visual analog scale pain score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) physical component score (PCS), and VR-12 mental component score (MCS). Each patient record was queried for an osteoporosis, osteopenia, or osteoporotic fracture diagnosis within a year before or after RCR. Patients with one of these diagnoses comprised the decreased bone mineral density group; whereas, patients without these diagnoses comprised the control group. An analysis of covariance was used to compare 2-year PROs while controlling for age, sex, tear size, preop ASES, preop VR-12 MCS, preop VR-12 PCS, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Significance was set at α = 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three-hundred fifty-seven patients were included. The mean age was 59.8 ± 10.0 years, and 191 (53.5%) were male. There were 30 patients (8.4%) in the decreased bone mineral density group and 327 patients (91.6%) in the control group. One hundred eighty-two (51.0%) patients had large or massive tears, and 175 patients (49.0%) had small or medium tears. There were no baseline differences between groups based on Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = .092), VR-12 MCS mean scores (P = .924), and initial ASES mean scores (P = .183). A small baseline difference existed in VR-12 PCS mean scores (P = .032). As expected, the decreased bone mineral density group had more females (28 of 30, P < .001) and older patients (67.6 ± 7.6 years vs. 59.1 ± 10.0 years, P < .001). Analysis of covariance identified no significant difference in 2-year ASES scores between groups (P = .216).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite previous literature showing the negative effect of osteoporosis on rotator cuff healing, our data showed no relationship between decreased bone mineral density and 2-year clinical outcomes following RCR. Patients with decreased bone mineral density can still achieve excellent 2-year outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":50051,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2025.02.011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Many prognostic factors associated with healing after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair have been evaluated. It has been shown from previous literature that osteoporosis is an independent risk factor for poor healing and increased need for revision surgery. To our knowledge, there has not been a study reporting patient reported outcomes (PROs) for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients with osteoporosis. The purpose of this study was to compare PROs of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) in patients with decreased bone mineral density to those with normal bone mineral density. We hypothesized that patients with decreased bone mineral density would have worse outcomes.

Methods: A retrospective chart review identified patients who had arthroscopic RCR with preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative PROs. Demographic data and rotator cuff tear size were recorded, and the PROs included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), visual analog scale pain score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) physical component score (PCS), and VR-12 mental component score (MCS). Each patient record was queried for an osteoporosis, osteopenia, or osteoporotic fracture diagnosis within a year before or after RCR. Patients with one of these diagnoses comprised the decreased bone mineral density group; whereas, patients without these diagnoses comprised the control group. An analysis of covariance was used to compare 2-year PROs while controlling for age, sex, tear size, preop ASES, preop VR-12 MCS, preop VR-12 PCS, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Significance was set at α = 0.05.

Results: Three-hundred fifty-seven patients were included. The mean age was 59.8 ± 10.0 years, and 191 (53.5%) were male. There were 30 patients (8.4%) in the decreased bone mineral density group and 327 patients (91.6%) in the control group. One hundred eighty-two (51.0%) patients had large or massive tears, and 175 patients (49.0%) had small or medium tears. There were no baseline differences between groups based on Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = .092), VR-12 MCS mean scores (P = .924), and initial ASES mean scores (P = .183). A small baseline difference existed in VR-12 PCS mean scores (P = .032). As expected, the decreased bone mineral density group had more females (28 of 30, P < .001) and older patients (67.6 ± 7.6 years vs. 59.1 ± 10.0 years, P < .001). Analysis of covariance identified no significant difference in 2-year ASES scores between groups (P = .216).

Conclusion: Despite previous literature showing the negative effect of osteoporosis on rotator cuff healing, our data showed no relationship between decreased bone mineral density and 2-year clinical outcomes following RCR. Patients with decreased bone mineral density can still achieve excellent 2-year outcomes.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
23.30%
发文量
604
审稿时长
11.2 weeks
期刊介绍: The official publication for eight leading specialty organizations, this authoritative journal is the only publication to focus exclusively on medical, surgical, and physical techniques for treating injury/disease of the upper extremity, including the shoulder girdle, arm, and elbow. Clinically oriented and peer-reviewed, the Journal provides an international forum for the exchange of information on new techniques, instruments, and materials. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery features vivid photos, professional illustrations, and explicit diagrams that demonstrate surgical approaches and depict implant devices. Topics covered include fractures, dislocations, diseases and injuries of the rotator cuff, imaging techniques, arthritis, arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and rehabilitation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信