Rotator Cuff Repair With Patch Augmentation Is Associated With Lower Retear Rates for Large Tears: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing clinical outcomes of rotator cuff repair with and without patch augmentation. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials that directly compared outcomes between rotator cuff repair (RCR) with versus without patch augmentation. Patients were evaluated based on retear rate, histological outcomes, radiological outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (Constant score; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ASES score; University of California-Los Angeles shoulder scale; Simple Shoulder Test; EuroQol-visual analog scale; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score; and PENN shoulder score questionnaire). RESULTS: Six studies (1 level I, 5 level II) met inclusion criteria, including 188 patients undergoing RCR alone (Control) and 193 patients undergoing RCR with patch augmentation (Patch). Patient age ranged from 56.0 to 68.0 years. The mean follow-up time ranged from 14.0 to 68.4 months. The average body mass index ranged from 24.4 to 29.4, and the overall percentage of males ranged from 32.5% to 82.3%. Three studies found significantly decreased retear rates with patch augmentation. The retear rate ranged from 34.0% to 65.4% in the Control group and 9.1% to 52.9% in the Patch group. One study found a significant difference for the Constant score favoring the Patch group. Two studies found a significant difference for the ASES score favoring the Patch group. One study found significantly better results with patch augmentation in terms of repaired tendon thickness and footprint coverage, based on magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Patch augmentation of rotator cuff repairs may be associated with lower retear rates for large tears. There is limited evidence to suggest that patch augmentation is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of level I and II studies.