Intraoperative Channeling in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Durable immunomodulatory hierarchical patch for rotator cuff repairing

Degradable rotator cuff patches, followed over five years, have been observed to exhibit high re-tear rates exceeding 50%, which is attributed to the inability of degradable polymers alone to restore the post-rotator cuff tear (RCT) inflammatory niche. Herein, poly(ester-ferulic acid-urethane)urea (PEFUU) was developed, featuring prolonged anti-inflammatory functionality, achieved by the integration of ferulic acid (FA) into the polyurethane repeating units. PEFUU stably releases FA in vitro, reversing the inflammatory niche produced by M1 macrophages and restoring the directed differentiation of stem cells. Utilizing PEFUU, hierarchical composite nanofiber patch (HCNP) was fabricated, simulating the natural microstructure of the tendon-to-bone interface with an aligned-random alignment. The incorporation of enzymatic hydrolysate derived from decellularized Wharton jelly tissue into the random layer could further enhance cartilage regeneration at the tendon-to-bone interface. Via rat RCT repairing model, HCNP possessing prolonged anti-inflammatory properties uniquely facilitated physiological healing at the tendon-to-bone interface's microstructure. The alignment of fibers was restored, and histologically, the characteristic tripartite distribution of collagen I - collagen II - collagen I was achieved. This study offers a universal approach to the functionalization of degradable polymers and provides a foundational reference for their future applications in promoting the in vivo regeneration of musculoskeletal tissues.

Similar Healing Rates of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair With and Without Bone Marrow Stimulation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Bone marrow stimulation (BMS) techniques such as microfracture, nanofracture, and the crimson duvet procedure expose the bone marrow of the proximal humerus to the rotator cuff tendon footprint. The effect of performing BMS on tendon healing is a subject of interest.

PURPOSE

To compare studies on arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with BMS versus without BMS for rotator cuff tears according to healing rates and clinical and radiological outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

The 2020 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed in conducting a search. Studies that compared arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without BMS were included if they provided postoperative patient-reported outcomes and healing rates. Dichotomous outcomes were expressed as mean differences (MDs), while continuous outcomes were expressed as odds ratio.

RESULTS

Included were 5 studies (N = 499 shoulders); 4 studies had level 1 evidence, and 1 study had level 2 evidence. The healing rate of rotator cuff repair was similar between the 2 groups (ie, with and without BMS) (odds ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 0.63 to 4.00]; P = .33). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the postoperative Constant score (MD, 1.41 [95% CI, -0.58 to 3.39]; P = .16), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (MD, 0.77 [95% CI, -1.43 to 2.96]; P = .49), or range of motion for forward flexion (MD, 2.45 [95% CI, -0.66 to 5.57]; P = .12) and external rotation (MD, 0.81 [95% CI, -2.35 to 3.97]; P = .62) at the final follow-up between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

The healing rate of rotator cuff repair was similar, regardless of whether BMS was performed or not. Additionally, there was no significant difference in postoperative patient-reported outcome scores, range of motion, and complications.

REGISTRATION

CRD42023388427 (PROSPERO).

Postoperative Antiosteoporotic Treatment with Zoledronic Acid Improves Rotator Cuff Healing but Does Not Improve Outcomes in Female Patients with Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized Study

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of the antiosteoporotic agent zoledronic acid (ZA) on rotator cuff healing and clinical outcomes in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 138 female patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis who were scheduled to undergo arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) from March 2020 to March 2021. Patients were randomly allocated to the ZA group (ARCR followed by intravenous ZA infusions at postoperative Day 1 and 1 year later) and the control group (ARCR alone). All patients were followed up for 24 months. Tendon healing was evaluated by ultrasonography at 6 weeks and 24 months after surgery. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index, and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for pain were recorded at each follow-up, and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients were included in the final analysis, 61 in the ZA group and 63 in the control group. There was no statistically significant difference in participant characteristics between the 2 groups. The ZA group had a significantly higher tendon healing rate than the control group at 2 years after surgery (odds ratio = 5.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-18.7; P = .014). Regarding clinical outcomes, 100% of patients exceeded the MCID in both groups, and no significant differences were found at 2 years after surgery between the 2 groups (ASES: 2.5 [95% CI, -2.2 to 7.2; P = .291]; WORC index: 4.5 [95% CI, -0.117 to 9.117; P = .056]; NRS: -0.1 [95% CI, -0.3 to 0.1; P = .394]).

CONCLUSIONS

Antiosteoporotic treatment with ZA reduced the retear rate but did not significantly influence the clinical outcomes after ARCR in female patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Outcomes of ARCR showed good results in both groups and exceeded the MCID.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Bone Marrow Stimulation for Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Bone marrow stimulation (BMS) has been proposed to augment healing at the time of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) by creating several bone marrow vents in the footprint of the rotator cuff, allowing mesenchymal stem cells, platelets, and growth factors to cover the area as a "crimson duvet."

PURPOSE

To perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the outcomes after BMS and a control for those undergoing ARCR.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A literature search of 3 databases was performed based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. RCTs comparing BMS and a control for ARCR were included. Clinical outcomes were compared, and a P value <.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 7 RCTs with 576 patients were included. Overall, 18.8% of patients treated with BMS and 21.0% of patients treated with a control had a retear (I2 = 43%; P = .61). With BMS, the mean Constant score was 88.2, and with the control, the mean Constant score was 86.7 (P = .12). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (94.3 vs 93.2, respectively; P = .31) or visual analog scale score (0.9 vs 0.9, respectively; P = .89).

CONCLUSION

The level 1 evidence in the literature did not support BMS as a modality to improve retear rates or clinical outcomes after ARCR.

Effect of Bone Marrow Stimulation on Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) is a common orthopaedic procedure, but it has a high rate of retears that can negatively affect the functional outcomes. Bone marrow stimulation (BMS) has been suggested as an additional treatment to improve the outcomes of RCR.

Purpose

To compare the effectiveness of the BMS procedure during RCR with conventional RCR.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, on March 1, 2023, for studies comparing postoperative retear rates and functional outcomes between patients who underwent primary arthroscopic RCR with and without the BMS procedure. Only level 1 and 2 randomized controlled trials with a minimum 12-month follow-up were included. The primary outcomes were retear rates and functional outcomes as measured by the Constant; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES); and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) scores and by postoperative range of motion. Subgroup analyses were performed based on repair technique (single-row repair vs double-row or suture-bridge repair). The standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) were utilized to synthesize continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. Homogeneity was evaluated using the chi-square test and I2 statistic.

Results

The literature search yielded 661 articles, of which 6 studies (522 patients; 261 with BMS, 261 without BMS) met the eligibility criteria. The combined analysis showed no significant decrease in retear rates with the utilization of the BMS procedure during RCR (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.03; P = .07; I2 = 24%). There was no significant intergroup difference in functional outcomes (Constant score: SMD, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.31; P = .13; I2 = 0%; ASES score: SMD, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.20 to 0.28; P = .73; I2 = 0%; UCLA score: SMD, -0.13; 95% CI, -0.50 to 0.23; P = .47; I2 = 0%). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences in postoperative retear risk or total Constant score according to the repair technique.

Conclusion

Based on the available evidence, this systematic review did not find a significant benefit of the BMS procedure at the footprint during arthroscopic RCR compared with conventional RCR in terms of retear rates and functional outcomes at short-term follow-up.

Bone channeling in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of level I studies

BACKGROUND

There is ongoing controversy regarding the effect of bone channeling in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Since the most recent systematic reviews in 2019, several large high-level trials have been completed. This study assessed all available level I randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without bone marrow channeling.

METHODS

A systematic search of the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted through mid January 2023. Two reviewers performed screening of studies meeting the eligibility criteria: English-language RCTs in patients aged ≥18 years comparing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair of full-thickness tears with and without bone marrow channeling (channeling group and control group, respectively). Functional scores, pain, healing rates, and reoperations were reviewed using pooled analysis where appropriate. The methodologic quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

A total of 6 randomized studies (N = 593) met the inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis of all 6 studies showed no significant mean difference in function (1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.63 to 3.26), as measured by the Constant-Murley score. Retear rates were also not statistically different between groups (risk ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.71), with pooled retear rates of 19.6% (48 of 245) with channeling and 19.8% (51 of 257) without. The other outcomes of interest were only available for analysis in a subset of studies. There were no standardized mean differences in pain (0.09; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.36), and there were similar reoperation rates (risk ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.43 to 3.34) in the channeling and control groups. For the included studies, the overall quality of evidence by outcome was judged to be moderate (function, pain, and reoperations) or low (retear rates), mainly owing to risk of bias (all outcomes) and inconsistency (retear rates).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study refute the findings of prior systematic reviews that showed that channeling reduces the retear rate when combined with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. This meta-analysis of level I evidence, including recent larger RCTs, demonstrates that bone marrow stimulation in the setting of primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has no significant effect on functional outcomes, healing, pain, or reoperation rates.

Sling Versus Abduction Brace Shoulder Immobilization After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

The optimal immobilization position of the shoulder after rotator cuff repair is controversial.

Purpose

To compare the clinical outcomes and incidence of retears after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair between patients who used an abduction brace versus a sling for postoperative shoulder immobilization.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared abduction brace and sling immobilization after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using single-row, double-row, or suture-bridge fixation. Clinical scores, pain severity, and retear rates were compared between patients with abduction brace versus sling immobilization.

Results

Of 1572 retrieved studies, 4 RCTs with a total of 224 patients (112 patients with abduction brace and 112 patients with sling) were included in the qualitative analysis, and 3 of the RCTs were included in the quantitative analysis (meta-analysis). There were no significant differences between the abduction brace and sling immobilization groups in the Constant-Murley score at 3 months (weighted mean difference [WMD], 0.26 [95% CI, -1.30 to 1.83]; P = .74; I 2 = 84%), 6 months (WMD, 1.91 [95% CI, -0.17 to 4.00]; P = .07; I 2 = 85%), and 12 months (WMD, 0.55 [95% CI, -1.37 to 2.47]; P = .57; I 2 = 0%); the visual analog scale score for pain at 1 week (WMD, 0.10 [95% CI, -0.20 to 0.41]; P = .51; I 2 = 0%), 3 weeks (WMD, -0.12 [95% CI, -0.34 to 1.00]; P = .29; I 2 = 0%), 6 weeks (WMD, -0.12 [95% CI, -0.30 to 0.06]; P = .20; I 2 = 0%), and 12 weeks (WMD, -0.13 [95% CI, -0.27 to 0.02]; P = .09; I 2 = 18%); or the retear rate at 3 months (risk ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.09 to 4.23]; P = .64; Z = 0.47%) postoperatively.

Conclusion

Our systematic review demonstrated a lack of significant differences between the abduction brace and sling immobilization groups regarding postoperative clinical scores, pain severity, and tendon healing.