scholarly journals A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Comparing Clinical Outcomes After Concurrent Rotator Cuff Repair and Long Head Biceps Tenodesis or Tenotomy

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 303-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Leroux ◽  
Jaskarndip Chahal ◽  
David Wasserstein ◽  
Nikhil N. Verma ◽  
Anthony A. Romeo
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biceps Tenodesis ◽  
Long Head ◽  
Long Head Biceps ◽  
Cuff Repair

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Supervised versus Unsupervised Rehabilitation for Rotator-Cuff Repair: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 2852
Author(s):  
Umile Giuseppe Longo ◽  
Alessandra Berton ◽  
Laura Risi Ambrogioni ◽  
Daniela Lo Presti ◽  
Arianna Carnevale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Motor Units ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Therapy Technique ◽  
Cuff Repair

Background: The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy between supervised and unsupervised rehabilitation after rotator-cuff (RC) repair in terms of clinical outcomes, visual-analog-scale (VAS) score, range of motion (ROM), and risk of retear. Material: a comprehensive search of Pubmed, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, Ovid, and Google Scholar databases through a combination of the following keywords with logical Boolean operators: “informed”, “uninformed”, “unsupervised”, “supervised”, “rehabilitation”, “physical therapy”, “physical therapies”, “postoperative period”, “physical-therapy techniques”, “physical-therapy technique”, “exercise”, “exercise therapy”, “rotator cuff”, “rotator-cuff tear”, and “rotator-cuff repair”. For each article included in the study, the following data were extracted: authors, year, study design, sample size and demographic features, RC tear characteristics, clinical outcomes, ROM, VAS score, retear rate, and time of follow-up. Meta-analysis was performed in terms of VAS score. Results: Four randomized control trials with 132 patients were included. One study demonstrated significant improvement in VAS, active ROM, and the activity of the muscle’s motor units at stop and during maximal effort in supervised patients. Another one showed lower retear rates in the supervised group. The remaining two randomized controlled trials did not reveal any significant differences between supervised and unsupervised rehabilitation in terms of clinical outcomes. Moreover, higher costs were described for supervised rehabilitation. The VAS was not significantly different in the two groups (9.9 compared with 8.25, p = 0.23). Conclusions: although several publications address the problem of RC lacerations, there is a paucity of evidence in the literature regarding the effectiveness of supervised and unsupervised rehabilitation protocols. This systematic review and meta-analysis showed no significant differences between the two types of rehabilitation in terms of VAS scores, while outlining the pros and cons of each protocol.

scholarly journals Long head BIceps TEnodesis or tenotomy in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: BITE study protocol

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek Friedrich Petrus van Deurzen ◽  
◽  
Vanessa Antoinet Bernice Scholtes ◽  
Nienke Willemien Willigenburg ◽  
Navin Gurnani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Study Protocol ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Biceps Tenodesis ◽  
Long Head ◽  
Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff ◽  
Long Head Biceps ◽  
Cuff Repair

No difference between tenotomy vs tenodesis for the long head of the biceps tendinopathy in rotator cuff repair: a systematic review

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-96
Author(s):  
Nicola Maffulli ◽  
Rocco Papalia ◽  
Guglielmo Torre ◽  
Sebastiano Vasta ◽  
Giuseppe Papalia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Long Head ◽  
Cuff Repair

Return to Work After Primary Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652097542
Author(s):  
Eric D. Haunschild ◽  
Ron Gilat ◽  
Ophelie Lavoie-Gagne ◽  
Michael C. Fu ◽  
Tracy Tauro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Return To Work ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Work Outcomes ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Work Intensity ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
Cuff Repair

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.

scholarly journals Is routine distal clavicle resection necessary in rotator cuff repair surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 39-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Livingstone ◽  
Rafik Asaid ◽  
Afshin Kamali Moaveni
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Analogue Scale ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Distal Clavicle ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Cuff Repair ◽  
Distal Clavicle Resection

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document