Clinical Outcomes and Repair Integrity after Arthroscopic Full-thickness Rotator Cuff Repair: Traditional Suture-bridge Versus Novel Modified Suture-bridge Technique
Authors: Han Zengshuai , Ma Wenru , Zhang Dongfang , Zhang Yi , Qi Chao , Yu Tengbo 
Published: November 2021

Abstract
Background: This prospective study compared the clinical and radiologic outcomes of patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs by the traditional suture bridge technique and the modified suture bridge technique.Methods: From December 2018 to December 2019, 50 consecutive cases of full-thickness medium rotator cuff tear, 1 to 3 cm in the coronal plane, for which arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was performed, were included. The TSB technique was used in 24 consecutive shoulders; and the MSB technique, in 26 consecutive shoulders. Clinical outcomes at 3 months, 6 months and a minimum of 1 years (mean, 11.92±1.92months) were evaluated postoperatively using range of shoulder, the visual analog scale score; University of California Los Angeles Shoulder Scale score; Constant-Murley shoulder score and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Subjective Shoulder Scale score. All patients underwent preoperative MRI and B-US to identify the rotator cuff tear, and postoperatively at final follow-up to evaluate tendon integrity. Results: At the final follow-up, the clinical outcomes improved in both groups. There were no significant differences in the results of the ROM between the two groups at 3 months, 6 months and the final follow-up. The average VAS score decreased from 6.12±0.95 to 1.04±0.45 in MSB Group and decreased from 6.29±0.91 to 1.33±0.48 at the final follow-up in TSB Group. The VAS score significantly differed between the two groups only at the final follow-up (P=0.03). The mean UCLA score increased from 12.23±3.47 to 30.96±2.54 in MSB Group and increased from 11.50±4.00 to 28.79±4.47 in TSB Group at the final follow-up; the mean Constant shoulder score increased from 40.54±5.61 to 92.08±7.21 in MSB Group and increased from 41.79±5.51 to 86.96±8.42 in TSB Group at the final follow-up. The average ASES score increased from 36.04±2.47 to 96.04±7.28 in MSB Group and increased from 35.04±3.10 to 91.50±7.33 in TSB Group at the final follow-up. The UCLA (P=0.044), Constant (P=0.025), ASES (P=0.033) score significantly differed between the two groups only at the final follow-up. At the final follow-up postoperatively, the MRI assessments showed no retear in MSB Group and two retears in TSB Group (8%)(Z=-1.538, P=0.124), B-US assessments showed no retear in MSB Group and one retear in TSB Group (4%)(Z=-1.169, P=0.242). No significant difference was found between the 2 groups regarding cuff integrity in accordance with MRI assessments and B-US assessmentsConclusion: For medium-sized RCTs, the patients who underwent MSB repair had shown better shoulder functional outcomes and a lower but not significant re-tear rate with those who underwent TSB repair. Therefore, the MSB repair technique can be considered an effective treatment for patients with medium-sized full-thickness RCTs.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04825249 Level of evidence: A prospective study, Level II.