Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2022 Feb 1;30(3):e395-e404.
doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-21-00543.

Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty After Prior Rotator Cuff Repair: A Matched Cohort Analysis

Erick M Marigi  1 , Carl Tams, Joseph J King, Matthew M Crowe, Jean-David Werthel, Josef Eichinger, Thomas Wright, Richard J Friedman, Bradley S Schoch
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty After Prior Rotator Cuff Repair: A Matched Cohort Analysis

Erick M Marigi et al. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. .

Abstract

Introduction: Rotator cuff repair (RCR) is commonly performed before reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with conflicting evidence on the effect on arthroplasty outcomes. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the effect of a prior RCR on the outcomes and complications of primary RSA.

Methods: Between 2007 and 2017, 438 RSAs performed in patients with a prior RCR and 876 case-matched controls were identified from a multicenter database. Patients were grouped based on a preoperative diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) and rotator cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). Data collected included range of motion, strength, complications, and revisions. Additional clinical metrics included American Shoulder and Elbow Society score, Constant score, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, Simple Shoulder Test, and the University of California Los Angeles shoulder score.

Results: Compared with controls, both GHOA and CTA study groups demonstrated lower postoperative forward elevation (FE) (133° versus 147°, P < 0.001; 133° versus 139°, P = 0.048) and FE trength (6.5 versus 8.2, P = 0.004; 6.1 versus 7.3, P = 0.014). In addition, inferior improvements were observed in the GHOA and CTA study groups with respect to abduction (38° versus 52°, P = 0.001; 36° versus 49°, P = 0.001), FE (41° versus 60°, P < 0.001; 38° versus 52°, P = 0.001), ER (16° versus 25°, P < 0.001; 10° versus 17°, P = 0.001), and Constant score (28.4 versus 37.1, P < 0.001; 26.2 versus 30.9, P = 0.016). Compared with controls, no differences were observed in the GHOA and CTA study groups with respect to notching (11.2% versus 5.6%, P = 0.115; 5.8% versus 7.9%, P = 0.967), complications (4.3% versus 1.6%, P = 0.073; 2.5% versus 2.7%, P = 0.878), and revision surgery (3.1% versus 0.9%, P = 0.089; 1.1% versus 1.3%, P = 0.822).

Conclusion: RSA after a prior RCR improves both pain and function, without increasing scapular notching, complications, or revision surgery. However, compared with patients without a prior RCR, postoperative shoulder function may be slightly decreased.

Level of evidence: III; Retrospective Cohort Study.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Teunis T, Lubberts B, Reilly BT, Ring D: A systematic review and pooled analysis of the prevalence of rotator cuff disease with increasing age. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2014;23:1913-1921.
    1. Colvin AC, Egorova N, Harrison AK, Moskowitz A, Flatow EL: National trends in rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012;94:227-233.
    1. Rossi LA, Chahla J, Verma NN, Millett PJ, Ranalletta M: Rotator Cuff Retears. JBJS Rev 2020;8:e0039.
    1. 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. JBJS 2004;86:219-224.
    1. Duquin TR, Buyea C, Bisson LJ: Which method of rotator cuff repair leads to the highest rate of structural healing? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med 2010;38:835-841.

Publication types

MeSH terms