This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes after full-thickness RC repair with and without performing augmentation with a bioinductive collagen implant (BCI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent primary repair of a full-thickness supraspinatus tear between 05/2021 and 11/2023 were retrospectively identified. Patients at elevated risk for retear were defined by biological, radiographic, and intraoperative risk factors. Those who underwent repair with or without concomitant augmentation using a BCI and who had both clinical and radiographic follow-up at 1 year postoperatively were matched in a 1:1 ratio according to age, sex, body mass index, tear size, smoking status, diabetes, and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification. Range of motion (ROM) as well as patient-reported outcome measures (Auto-Constant-Score (CS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain) were recorded. Magnetic resonance imaging performed at 1 year postoperatively was analyzed and the presence of retear was recorded. RESULTS: In total, 149 patients with a radiographic and clinical follow-up at 1 year postoperatively were identified. Of these, 23 patients with BCI augmentation were matched to 23 patients without placement of BCI (48% female, 59.2 ± 8.4 years at surgery). A retear occurred in 5 patients (21.7%) in the BCI augmentation group and in 3 patients (13.0%) in the control group (p = 0.72). No significant difference was reported regarding the CS (77 [71-83] vs. 76 [63-81], p = 0.5), ASES Score (92 [82-98] vs. 90 [84-95], p = 0.8), SSV (90 [80-100] vs. 90 [88-95], p = 0.9), VAS for pain (p = 0.74), or ROM between the groups. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective matched cohort of patients at elevated risk for retear, augmentation of full-thickness RC repair with a BCI was not associated with a reduced retear rate. Moreover, no significant differences regarding clinical and functional outcome were found between the two groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III - Retrospective case series with a matched control group.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rab et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: