Key result
Transosseous arthroscopic fixation achieved similar clinical and functional outcomes compared to single-row anchor repair for rotator cuff tears at 12 months, with no significant difference in ASES scores (p=0.439).
Why the study?
Given significant failure rates and considerable costs of suture anchors, this study evaluated whether anchorless transosseous arthroscopic fixation achieves similar or better functional outcomes than single-row anchor fixation for rotator cuff tears.
Does anchorless transosseous arthroscopic fixation achieve similar or better functional outcomes than single-row fixation with anchors in patients with rotator cuff tears?
Cohort (n=60)
simple randomisation
No
Does anchorless transosseous arthroscopic fixation achieve similar or better functional outcomes than single-row fixation with anchors in patients with rotator cuff tears?
Absolute Event Rate: 91.6% vs 91.7%
p-value: p=0.439
Transosseous repair is as effective as single-row anchor repair for rotator cuff tears, achieving similar clinical and functional outcomes.
Supports equivalence of anchorless transosseous to single-row anchor repair; leaves open need for RCTs on cost-effectiveness and healing.
Background: Transosseous repair (TO) has declined in popularity since the introduction of suture anchors and arthroscopic methods in 1985. Nevertheless, failure rates remain significant, at 12% to 40% and the cost of these devices is considerable. Consequently, interest has revived in arthroscopic transosseous technique, the aim of this study was to evaluate whether anchorless transosseous arthroscopic fixation achieves similar or better functional outcomes than single-row fixation with anchors in patients with rotator cuff tears. Methods: 60 shoulders with complete rotator cuff tears were evaluated, divided into two groups based on fixation technique: Group 1 (transosseous) and Group 2 (single row with anchors). All patients had a minimum 12-month follow-up, including clinical assessments (VAS, range of motion) and functional questionnaires (ASES, Constant scores). Results: No significant differences were found in VAS scores at 6 months (t=0.244, p=0.404) and 12 months (t=0.220, p=0.413). Additionally, there was no superiority of either group in motion ranges at 12 months (forward flexion t=0.732, p=0.234; external rotation t=1.608, p=0.057; abduction t=0.583, p=0.281). Both groups reported high postoperative satisfaction, with no differences in ASES (t=0.153, p=0.439) and constant scores (t=0.572, p=0.285) at 12 months. Conclusions: The transosseous repair technique is as effective as single-row anchor repair for rotator cuff repair, achieving similar clinical and functional outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kronthal et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Complete rotator cuff tear (n=60). Transosseous arthroscopic fixation vs. Single-row arthroscopic fixation with anchors was evaluated on ASES score at 12 months (p=0.439). Transosseous arthroscopic fixation achieved similar clinical and functional outcomes compared to single-row anchor repair for rotator cuff tears at 12 months, with no significant difference in ASES scores (p=0.439).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: