Clinical and Functional Outcomes From Rotator Cuff Tear Repair Using the Arthroscopic Versus Mini-Open Technique

TL;DR

This study compares arthroscopic and mini-open surgical techniques for rotator cuff repair and finds similar outcomes in terms of function and recovery after six months.

Contribution

The study provides a direct comparison of two surgical techniques for rotator cuff repair using a prospective design.

Findings

Both arthroscopic and mini-open techniques improved shoulder range of motion and function by six months.

There was no significant difference in outcomes between the two surgical techniques.

Surgery duration was the same for both techniques.

Abstract

Background

Rotator cuff tears cause shoulder pain and dysfunction and are commonly repaired using a surgical technique with an arthroscopic or mini-open method. This is a prospective study that compares the clinical and functional outcomes of these approaches.

Objective

This study aims to compare arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair in patients by assessing function and range of motion.

Methods

Fifty patients were admitted to Government Medical College, Patiala, a tertiary care hospital in northern India, and treated with either of the two techniques. Outcomes measured at baseline and repeated follow-ups included shoulder range of motion and scores on the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), with statistical comparisons.

Results

Both techniques showed significant improvements in range of motion and function by six months, with no significant difference between the groups. The duration of surgery was the same in both cases.

Conclusions

Arthroscopic and mini-open repairs yielded identical clinical and functional outcomes at six months. The decision on whether or not to use surgery may be driven by the surgeon's expertise. Therefore, long-term studies are needed.