medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2009, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2009; 23 (1)

Clinical-ultrasonographic assessment in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair after 1 -year follow-up

Cruz LF, Gómez EJC, Almazán DA, Pineda VC, Briseño ECA, Pérez JF, Ibarra PLJC

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 9-14
PDF size: 133.34 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Arthroscopic repair of the rotator cuff have shown have shown encouraging clinical results. However, few authors have assessed integrity of repair with ultrasound. The presence of re-rupture by ultrasonography in a rotator cuff repair may not relate to the patient’s functional status. Objective: We used ultrasonography to assess the prevalence of re-rupture in rotator cuff repairs and its clinical relevance with minimum 1 year postoperatively. Materials and methods: Evidence level IV (Case series). We evaluated 27 shoulders that underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Clinical evaluation was performed using UCLA functional scale, visual analogue scale (UCLA, VAS). Post-operative ultrasound was performed at least 1 year postoperatively. Statistical analysis was done with the SPSS 11.0 software. Results: We examined 27 shoulders, mean age 56.4 (41-78), mean postoperative follow-up 19.6 (12m-88m). Clinical assessment with UCLA functional scale results were: good-excellent (77.4%); fair (22.2%). VAS results showed that 44.4% reported VAS of 0; in the range of 1-3 VAS was 55.5% of the patients. Ultrasound evaluation showed no injury in 37%; partial lesion 51.9%, and a total lesion 11.1%. Thirty-three % of the patients with VAS of 0 showed no injury when evaluated by ultrasonography, injury by ultrasound 33.3% with VAS (1-3) 22.2%. UCLA (good-excellent) without injury by ultrasound 33.3% with a 44.4% degree of injury, UCLA (Fair) without injury 3.7%, with some degree of lesion 18.5%. Results no statistically significant difference (p › 0.05). Conclusions: In our series, we find that integrity of rotator cuff postoperative ultrasound, it has no effect on the functional status of patients with postoperative follow-up of at least 1 year, with UCLA and VAS.


REFERENCES

  1. Prickett WD, Teefey SA, Galatz LM: Accuracy of ultrasound imaging of the rotator cuff in shoulders that are painful postoperatively. J Bone Joint Surg 2003; 85A(6): 1084-9.

  2. Wulker N, Melzer C, Wirth CJ: Shoulder surgery for rotator cuff tears: ultrasonographic 3-year follow-up of 97 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 1991; 62: 142-7.

  3. Mack LA, Nyberg DA, Matsen FR 3rd, Kilcoyne RF, Harvey D: Sonography of the postoperative shoulder. Am J Roentgenol 1988; 150: 1089-93.

  4. Longobardi RS, Rafii M, Minkoff J: MR imaging of the postoperative shoulder. Magn Reson Imaging Orthop Clin North Am 1997; 5: 841-59.

  5. Stephen Fealy, Ronald S. Adler, Mark C. Drakos, et al: Patterns of vascular and anatomical response after rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34(1): 120-7.

  6. Rasmussen OS: Sonography of tendons. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2000; 10: 360-4.

  7. Adler RS, Fealy S: Ultrasound of rotator cuff tears: Current Status Techniques in Shoulder. Shoulder Elbow Surg 2003; 4(3): 121-32.

  8. Kijowski E, De Smet AA: The role of ultrasound in the evaluation of sports medicine injuries of the upper extremity. Clin Sports Med 2006; (25): 569-90.

  9. Beggs I: Ultrasound of the shoulder and elbow. Orthop Clin North Am 2006; (37): 277-85.

  10. Moosmayer S, Hans-Jorgen S: Diagnostic ultrasound of the shoulder-a method for experts only? Results from an orthopedic surgeon with relative inexperience compared to operative findings. Acta Orthop 2005; 76(4): 503-8.

  11. Iannotti JP, Ciccone J, Buss DD, et al: Accuracy of office-based ultrasonography of the shoulder for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87: 1305-11.

  12. Adler RS, Fealy S, Drakos M, et al: Vascular recruitment patterns in the repaired rotator cuff. Radiology 2001; 221: 507.

  13. Gamradt SC, Scott AR, Russell FW: Platelet rich plasma in rotator cuff repair. Tech Orthop 2007: 22(1): 26-33.

  14. Harryman DT, Mack LA, Wang KY, et al: Repairs of the rotator cuff. Correlation of functional results with integrity of the cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1991; 73: 982-9.

  15. Galatz LM, Ball CM, Teefey SA, Middleton WD, Yamaguchi K: The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86: 219-24.

  16. Anderson K, Boothby M, Aschenbrener D, van Holsbeeck M: Minimum 2-year follow-up outcome and structural integrity after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using 2 rows of fixation. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34; 1899-905.

  17. Mellado JM, Calmet J, Olona M: MR assessment of the repaired rotator cuff: prevalence, size, location and clinical relevance of tendon rerupture. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 2186-96.

  18. Amstutz HC, Sew Hoy AL, Clarke IC: UCLA anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1981; 155: 7-20.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com