Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume, Vol 90-B, Issue SUPP_II, 355.  
Copyright © 2008 by British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mullett, H.
Right arrow Articles by Copeland, S.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Mullett, H.
Right arrow Articles by Copeland, S.

British Elbow and Shoulder Society: PODIUM PRESENTATIONS - SHOULDER

Edinburgh, Scotland: 31 May–2 June 2006

President: Tim Bunker

SMALL & MEDIUM ROTATOR CUFF TEARS: COMPARISON OF ARTHROSCOPIC ROTATOR CUFF REPAIR VS ARTHROSCOPIC SUBACROMIAL DECOMPRESSION

H. Mullett; V. Venkateswaran; T Even; S. Massoud; O. Levy; and S. Copeland

Reading Shoulder Unit, Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading, UK.

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has evolved significantly in the last decade and has become a standard treatment. Satisfactory results of arthroscopic subacromial decompression (ASD) in the treatment of rotator cuff tears have also been reported (1). The aim of this study was to compare the outcome following arthroscopic repair versus decompression alone in patients with small & medium rotator cuff tears (Classification of Post, Silver & Singh (2). There were 114 patients in the ASD group and 96 in the Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair group (RCR). The groups were statistically comparable in terms of patient age & gender. Clinical follow-up was performed at a minimum of 12 months post -operatively (average 36 months). The average Post-op Constant score was 69.8 for the ASD group and 86.4 for the RCR group. The average post-op pain score (S.D) in the ASD group was 10.9 (± 4.3) and in the RCR group was 13.6 (± 3.1). Post operative strength was 7.6 (± 3.6) in the ASD group and 16.7 (± 5.4) in the RCR group.26 patients (22.8%) in the ASD group and 3 (3.3%) of the RCR group required futher surgery. Patient satisfaction (maximum 10 points) was 7.4% in the ASD group and 8.9 (± 1.4) in the RCR. The results of this study support arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Shoulder strength is improved and there is significant reduction in the need for revision surgery.

The abstracts were prepared by Cormac Kelly. Correspondence should be addressed to The Secretary, British Elbow and Shoulder Society, Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE






(c) British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery All Rights Reserved
Registered charity no: 209299     Print ISSN: 0301-620X
Hip, Knee, Trauma, Upper limb, Foot & Ankle, Paediatrics, Oncology, Spine, Arthroplasty, General