Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Results in Improved Clinical Outcomes and Low Revision Rates at 10‐Year Follow‐Up: A Systematic Review
Martin S. Davey, Eoghan T. Hurley, Patrick J. Carroll, John G. Galbraith, Fintan J. Shannon, K. Kaar, Hannan Mullett
Abstract
PURPOSE: To study the literature to evaluate the functional outcomes, radiologic outcomes, and revision rates following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) at a minimum of 10-years follow-up. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed a literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Only studies reporting on outcomes of ARCR with a minimum 10-year follow-up were considered for inclusion. Patient demographics, satisfaction, and clinical, radiologic, and surgical outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Our search found 9 studies including 455 shoulders in 448 patients (51.6% male patients), with age at time of surgery ranging from 45 to 90 years met our inclusion criteria. Overall follow-up ranged from 10 to 18 years. At final follow-up, the ranges of American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons, age- and sex-adjusted Constant-Morley, and University of California Los Angeles scores were reported in 5, 6, and 3 studies, respectively, as 79.4 to 93.2, 73.2 to 94, and 26.5 to 33, respectively. Of the included studies, satisfaction rates varied in 6 studies from 85.7% to 100% in the long-term. Additionally, the overall radiologic retear rate ranged from 9.5% to 63.2%. The overall surgical revision rates ranged in 6 studies from 3.8% to 15.4%, with from 0% to 6.7% requiring revision ARCR and from 1.0% to 3.6% requiring revision subacromial decompression in 6 and 2 studies, respectively, at minimum 10-years' follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that ARCR results in high rates of patient satisfaction, satisfactory clinical outcomes with respect to patient-reported functional outcomes and range of motion, and low revision rates at minimum 10-years' follow-up. However, an overall 30% retear rate was observed in asymptomatic patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.