Superior capsule reconstruction, partial cuff repair, graft interposition, arthroscopic debridement or balloon spacers for large and massive irreparable rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Davies, Andrew; Singh, Prashant; Reilly, Peter; Sabharwal, Sanjeeve; Malhas, Amar

doi:10.1186/s13018-022-03411-y

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Table 2 Partial cuff repair—included studies

From: Superior capsule reconstruction, partial cuff repair, graft interposition, arthroscopic debridement or balloon spacers for large and massive irreparable rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author and date	Design	Mean age	No. of shoulders at f/u—PROMs	Follow-up duration (months)	Study results pooled	Functional/PROMs outcomes measured
Baverel [13]	Cohort–PCR vs LDTT	68.5	26	16–29	Yes	Constant, ASES, SSV, SST
Berth [14]	Cohort–PCR vs debridement	63.4	21	21–28	Yes	Constant, QuickDASH
Besnard [15]	Cohort–PCR vs complete	59.3	20	24–120	Yes	Constant
Cavalier [16]	Cohort–PCR vs debridement	67	61	12	No	Constant, ASES, SSV
Chen [17]	Case series	60.3	37	25–59	Yes	ASES
Cuff [18]	Case series	65.2	28	60–90	Yes	ASES, SST
Di Benedetto [19]	Case series	67	31	79	Yes	Constant
Farazdaghi [20]	Cohort–PCR vs complete	63.7	14	95	No	ASES, Penn
Franceschi [21]	Cohort–PCR vs debridement	62	34	60–108	Yes	UCLA
Galasso [22]	Case series	62.7	95	24–148	Yes	Constant, SST
Greiner [23]	Cohort–PCR vs SCR	62.3	20	47–79	No	Constant, DASH
Heuberer [24]	Cohort–PCR vs debridement	67	22	23–70	No	Constant, QuickDASH
Holtby [25]	Cohort–PCR vs complete	67	73	24	No	Constant, ASES
Jeong [26]	Cohort–PCR vs complete	61.9	33	60–120	Yes	UCLA, ASES, SSV
Kim [27]	Case series	62.3	27	36–52	Yes	Constant, SST
Kim [28]	Cohort–PCR vs complete	61.5	19	24	Yes	UCLA, ASES, SST
Lee [29]	Case series	61.2	42	31–78	Yes	UCLA, constant
Malahias [30]	Cohort–PCR vs PCR and balloon	69.7	16	12	Yes	Constant, ASES
Mori [31]	Cohort–PCR vs graft interposition	65.7	24	35.6	No	UCLA, Constant, ASES
Moser [32]	Cohort–PCR vs complete vs debridement (< 10 patients)	62.5	11	24	No	SPADI
Pandey [33]	Cohort–PCR vs graft interposition	58	13	24–60	Yes	Constant, OSS
Park [34]	Cohort–PCR vs augmentation	63.8	37	24–51	Yes	Constant, ASES, KSS
Paribelli [35]	Cohort–PCR vs LDTT	64.9	20	12–60	Yes	UCLA
Porcellini [36]	Case series	63	67	60	Yes	Constant, SST
Shon [37]	Case series	65.9	31	40 ± 14.9	Yes	ASES, SST
Wellmann [38]	Case series	65	38	12	No	Constant

Partial cuff repair—included studies. PCR—partial cuff repair, LDTT—latissimus dorsi tendon transfer, complete–complete cuff repair. Constant—Constant-Murley Score, QuickDASH—Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score, ASES—American Shoulder and Elbow Score, SSV—Subjective Shoulder Value, SST—Simple Shoulder Test, SPADI—Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, UCLA—The University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Score, KSS—Korean Shoulder Score, OSS—Oxford Shoulder Score, JOA—Japanese Orthopaedic Association score. For comparative studies, the number of shoulders for the relevant treatment arm is reported

Back to article page

ISSN: 1749-799X

Contact us

Submission enquiries: journalsubmissions@springernature.com