Transtendon Repair Under Switching-Scope Technique for Articular Partial-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears

Zhou, Zhi‐You; Ying, Hua; Wang, Zi-min

doi:10.1016/j.eats.2022.07.013

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Surgical techniques for PASTA lesions are still being debated [7, 16, 26, 33, 34, 47]. Previous studies have shown that the TTR and TCR techniques for arthroscopic PASTA repair have good clinical outcomes [1, 5, 6, 21, 30, 41, 43].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Similar outcomes between transtendon repair and tear completion repair techniques for partial articular‐sided supraspinatus tendon avulsion lesions: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Thamrongskulsiri

Limskul

Itthipanichpong

et al. 2023

Knee surg. sports traumatol. arthrosc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aimed to review studies comparing transtendon repair (TTR) with tear completion repair (TCR) techniques for partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon avulsion (PASTA) lesions according to postoperative patient-reported outcomes and complications. Methods Databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane, were searched for studies published between 2008 and 2022 that directly compared the postoperative patient-reported outcomes and complications of the TTR and TCR techniques for PASTA lesions. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, while mean diferences (MDs) were calculated for continuous outcomes. Results A total of seven studies (497 shoulders) were analysed. No statistically signiicant diferences in the postoperative clinical outcomes at the inal follow-up were observed between the TTR and TCR techniques for PASTA lesions. The overall retear rates of the TTR and TCR techniques were 7.7% and 11.6%, respectively (corresponding healing rates were 92.3% and 88.4%), whereas the overall occurrence rates of adhesive capsulitis were 4.7% and 3.3%, respectively. Furthermore, no signiicant diference was observed in postoperative range of motion (forward lexion, MD = − 1.22, 95% conidence interval (95%CI) − 5.28 to 3.34, n.s.; external rotation, MD = − 1.39, 95% CI − 3.19 to 0.42, n.s.), overall retear rate (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.29-1.08, n.s.), and occurrence rate of adhesive capsulitis (OR 1.11, n.s.) between the two techniques. Conclusion Both techniques improve clinical outcomes while having a low complication rate and a high rate of healing. No signiicant diference in clinical outcomes was observed between the two techniques. Level of evidence III.

show abstract