The Effects of Smoking on Clinical and Structural Outcomes After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author(s):  
Ning Fan ◽  
Shuo Yuan ◽  
Peng Du ◽  
Qichao Wu ◽  
Jian Li ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652097542
Author(s):  
Eric D. Haunschild ◽  
Ron Gilat ◽  
Ophelie Lavoie-Gagne ◽  
Michael C. Fu ◽  
Tracy Tauro ◽  
...  

Background: Rotator cuff tears are a prevalent pathology in injured workers, causing significant economic ramifications and time away from work. To date, published articles on work outcomes after rotator cuff repair have not been cumulatively assessed and analyzed. Purpose: To systematically review reports on return to work after rotator cuff repair and perform a meta-analysis on factors associated with improved work outcomes. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of return-to-work investigations was performed using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Individual studies reporting rates of return to previous work with level of evidence 1 to 4 were independently screened by 2 authors for inclusion, and study quality was assessed using the Methodologic Index for Non-randomized Studies and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Work outcome data were synthesized and analyzed using random effects modeling to identify differences in rates of return to previous work as a function of operative technique, work intensity, and workers’ compensation status. Results: Thirteen retrospective investigations comprising 1224 patients who underwent rotator cuff repair met inclusion criteria for this investigation. Across all investigations, a weighted average of 62.3% of patients returned to previous level of work at 8.15 ± 2.7 months (mean ± SD) after surgery. Based on random effects modeling, higher rates of return to previous work were identified with decreasing work intensity ( P < .001), while rates were similar between open and arthroscopic repair technique ( P = .418) and between workers’ compensation and non–workers’ compensation cohorts ( P = .089). All shoulder pain and functional outcome assessments demonstrated significant improvements at final follow-up when compared with baseline across all investigations. Conclusion: The majority of injured workers undergoing rotator cuff repair return to previous work at approximately 8 months after surgery. Despite this, >35% of patients are unable to return to their previous work level after their repair procedure. Similar rates of return to work can be anticipated regardless of workers’ compensation status and operative technique, while patients in occupations with higher physical intensity experience inferior work outcomes.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 39-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Livingstone ◽  
Rafik Asaid ◽  
Afshin Kamali Moaveni

Background The objective of the present study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials looking at the effect of distal clavicle resection in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (RCR). Methods A systematic literature search was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials looking at RCR +/– distal clavicle resection. Primary clinical outcome measures included in the meta-analysis were American Shoulder Elbow Society (ASES) score, pain on visual analogue scale and range of motion in forward elevation. Results The systematic review identified three studies with a total of 203 participants. Those who underwent distal clavicle resection in conjunction with RCR had worse pain and acromioclavicular joint tenderness at 3-month follow-up. This difference, however, was not observed at the 24-month follow-up. The mean difference (95% confidence interval) for the ASES score was 0.45 (–3.67 to 4.58) and pain on visual analogue scale was – 0.27 (–0.70 to 0.16). Conclusions Routine distal clavicle resection in the setting of rotator cuff repair does not result in improved outcomes for patients with no difference being observed at 24 months post surgery. The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis do not support routine distal clavicle resection when performing RCR.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. e0222953 ◽  
Author(s):  
Goris Nazari ◽  
Joy C. MacDermid ◽  
Dianne Bryant ◽  
Neha Dewan ◽  
George S. Athwal

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e022086
Author(s):  
Liang-Tseng Kuo ◽  
Chi-Lung Chen ◽  
Pei-An Yu ◽  
Yu-Shiun Tsai ◽  
Wei-Hsiu Hsu ◽  
...  

IntroductionBone marrow-stimulating (BMS) techniques during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery theoretically enhance the biological component for healing and hence improve tendon healing, but their efficacy remains unproven. The purpose of this review is to determine the effects and associated harms of BMS in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery.Methods and analysisWe will perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies (RCS) that compare outcomes following BMS use against no use of BMS during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery. We will search the databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline and Embase, and clinical trial registries for relevant studies. We will include studies published from start of indexing until 23 August 2018. Two reviewers will independently assess the eligibility for studies. For each included trial, we will conduct duplicate independent data extraction and risk of bias assessment. We will use the Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess the risk of bias of included RCTs, while we will use the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions tool to evaluate the risk of bias of RCS. We will perform a random-effects meta-analysis in calculating the pooled risk estimates when appropriate. We will assess the overall quality of the data for each individual outcome using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluation approach. The primary outcomes are tendon healing rate, overall pain and shoulder functions. The secondary outcomes are the proportion of participants with adverse events related to interventions, the range of motion and the proportion of participants with return to previous activities.Ethics and disseminationWe will report this review according to the guidance of the PRISMA statement. The results of this review will be disseminated through conference presentations and publications in peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018087161.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document