Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using a single or double row technique: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trial

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the double row technique versus the single row technique for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, in order to assess whether there are clinical differences.

Methods: Systematic review of randomized clinical trials comparing the clinical results of the double-row technique versus the single-row technique in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Demographic, clinical, and surgical variables were analyzed, including functional scores, tendon healing rate, and re-tear rate.

Results: Thirteen randomized clinical trials were selected. 437 patients in the single row group (50.7%) and 424 patients in the double row group (49.3%) were analyzed. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of age (P=.84), sex (P=.23) and loss to follow-up (P=.52). Significant differences were found for the better results of the double row technique at the UCLA level (P=.01). No significant differences were found on the Constant-Murley scale (P=.87) or on the ASES scale (P=.56). Similarly, there was a higher healing rate (P=.006) and less risk of rotator cuff re-tears with the double row technique (P=.006).

Conclusions: In rotator cuff repair, the double row technique was found to be superior to the single row technique in terms of better UCLA score, better tendon healing rate, and lower re-tear rate. No clinically significant differences were found on the Constant-Murley scale or on the ASES scale.

Keywords: Doble hilera, Revisión sistemática; Double row, Systematic review; Hilera simple; Hombro; Manguito rotador; Rotator cuff; Shoulder; Single row.