Partial repair versus superior capsule reconstruction in managing massive rotator cuff tears. A meta-analysis of the current evidence.

IF 1.5 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Mohamed A Khalafallah, Mohamed I Mohamed, Mohamed M Farrag, Hazem A Bishara, Duncan Muir, Ali Narvani, Emilio Calvo, Mohamed A Imam
{"title":"Partial repair versus superior capsule reconstruction in managing massive rotator cuff tears. A meta-analysis of the current evidence.","authors":"Mohamed A Khalafallah, Mohamed I Mohamed, Mohamed M Farrag, Hazem A Bishara, Duncan Muir, Ali Narvani, Emilio Calvo, Mohamed A Imam","doi":"10.1177/17585732251345137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rotator cuff tear (RCT) is a common musculoskeletal condition. Managing RCTs can be challenging. Initial treatments typically involve conservative approaches such as physical therapy and corticosteroid injections. This meta-analysis compared the functional and clinical outcomes of two surgical techniques, Partial Repair (PR) and Superior Capsular Reconstruction (SCR), for managing rotator cuff tears.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The search included studies published in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from 2013 to 2023. Studies comparing SCR with PR techniques in rotator cuff tear patients were included. Primary outcome was Constant shoulder score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four cohort studies, totaling 235 patients, were included and analysed. There were no statistically significant differences between SCR and PR groups in constant shoulder score (<i>P</i> = 0.12), disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (<i>P</i> = 0.42), acromiohumeral distance (<i>P</i> = 0.61), re-operation rate (<i>P</i> = 0.33), forward flexion (<i>P</i> = 0.73), and Visual Analog Score (VAS) score (<i>P</i> = 0.69). Heterogeneity was observed in some outcomes.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Based on the available low level of evidence and observed heterogeneity, this meta-analysis did not identify significant disparities in functional and clinical outcomes between SCR and PR. Further high-quality clinical trials with larger sample sizes are warranted to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732251345137"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12122475/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shoulder and Elbow","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17585732251345137","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: Rotator cuff tear (RCT) is a common musculoskeletal condition. Managing RCTs can be challenging. Initial treatments typically involve conservative approaches such as physical therapy and corticosteroid injections. This meta-analysis compared the functional and clinical outcomes of two surgical techniques, Partial Repair (PR) and Superior Capsular Reconstruction (SCR), for managing rotator cuff tears.

Methods: The search included studies published in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from 2013 to 2023. Studies comparing SCR with PR techniques in rotator cuff tear patients were included. Primary outcome was Constant shoulder score.

Results: Four cohort studies, totaling 235 patients, were included and analysed. There were no statistically significant differences between SCR and PR groups in constant shoulder score (P = 0.12), disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (P = 0.42), acromiohumeral distance (P = 0.61), re-operation rate (P = 0.33), forward flexion (P = 0.73), and Visual Analog Score (VAS) score (P = 0.69). Heterogeneity was observed in some outcomes.

Discussion: Based on the available low level of evidence and observed heterogeneity, this meta-analysis did not identify significant disparities in functional and clinical outcomes between SCR and PR. Further high-quality clinical trials with larger sample sizes are warranted to confirm these findings.

部分修复与上囊重建治疗大面积肩袖撕裂。对现有证据的荟萃分析。
背景:肩袖撕裂(RCT)是一种常见的肌肉骨骼疾病。管理随机对照试验可能具有挑战性。最初的治疗通常包括保守方法,如物理治疗和皮质类固醇注射。本荟萃分析比较了两种手术技术的功能和临床结果,部分修复(PR)和上囊重建(SCR),用于治疗肩袖撕裂。方法:检索2013年至2023年在PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane Library数据库中发表的研究。比较SCR和PR技术治疗肩袖撕裂患者的研究包括在内。主要终点为肩部评分。结果:纳入并分析了4项队列研究,共235例患者。SCR组与PR组在肩部恒定评分(P = 0.12)、手臂、肩部和手部残疾(P = 0.42)、肩肱距离(P = 0.61)、再手术率(P = 0.33)、前屈(P = 0.73)、视觉模拟评分(VAS)评分(P = 0.69)方面差异无统计学意义。在一些结果中观察到异质性。讨论:基于现有的低水平证据和观察到的异质性,本荟萃分析未发现SCR和PR在功能和临床结果方面存在显著差异。需要进一步进行更大样本量的高质量临床试验来证实这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Shoulder and Elbow
Shoulder and Elbow Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信