Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of arthroscopic findings between the groups

From: Are there differences in arthroscopic and histological features between traumatic and degenerative rotator cuff tears in elderly patients? A prospective dual-center analysis

Variable Group T (n = 19) Group D (n = 23) p value
Tear size
ML, mm 22.2 ± 6.6 24.4 ± 8.3 0.361a
AP, mm 22.0 ± 10.5 24.2 ± 9.7 0.245a
 Medium 13 (68.4) 14 (60.9)  
 Large 6 (31.6) 9 (39.1) 0.611b
Rotator cuff tendon status
 Good 13 (68.4) 0 (0.0)  
 Moderate 6 (31.6) 15 (65.2)  
 Poor 0 (0.0) 8 (34.8) < 0.001b
Displacement, mm 21.7 ± 7.0 24.4 ± 8.3 0.273a
Tension, N 11.6 ± 5.3 23.6 ± 8.2 < 0.001a
Stiffness, N/mm 0.56 ± 0.31 1.09 ± 0.67 < 0.001a
LHB absent 0 (0.0) 3 (13.0) 0.102b
LHB dislocation or subluxation 7 (36.8) 1 (4.4) 0.014b
LHB tear
 Normal 7 (36.8) 11 (47.8)  
 < 50% 9 (47.4) 8 (34.8)  
 ≥ 50% 3 (15.8) 4 (17.4) 0.699b
Subscapularis tendon tear 12 (63.2) 12 (52.2) 0.474b
Copeland–Levy classification
 Grade 0 4 (21.1) 0 (0.0)  
 Grade 1 11 (57.9) 4 (17.4)  
 Grade 2 4 (21.1) 13 (56.5)  
 Grade 3 0 (0.0) 6 (26.1) < 0.001b
  1. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation or n (%)
  2. Group T, traumatic rotator cuff tears; Group D, degenerative rotator cuff tears; ML, medial-to-lateral; AP, anterior-to-posterior; LHB, long head of the biceps
  3. aMann–Whitney U-test
  4. bChi square test