Try Procedures Consult free for 30 days
Administrators - Sign up for an institutional trial
Quick ReviewFull Details
Free pass users, sign-in here
Pre-ProcedureProcedurePost-Procedure
Help  |  Print
SAMPLE EXCERPT
- Full procedure text, video and illustrations available with Free Trial

Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

  • Editor(s): Todd W Thomsen, MD, Gary S Setnik, MD, FACEP
  • Section Editor(s): Phillip M Harter, MD
  • Contributor(s): Carmie Chan, MD
PRE-PROCEDURE
INDICATIONS
  • Partial-thickness rotator cuff tears, failed conservative treatment
  • Full-thickness rotator cuff tears
CONTRAINDICATIONS
  • Lack of surgeon familiarity with arthroscopic repair techniques
  • Low-demand patients with functional rotator cuff tears
  • Patients who require pain relief only
  • Patient unwillingness to comply with the rigorous postoperative rehabilitation program
  • Severe rotator cuff tear (rotator cuff arthropathy)
EQUIPMENT
  • Arthroscopy tower and equipment
  • Shoulder arthroscopy set
  • Suture passers/retrievers
  • Suture
  • Spinal needles
  • Suture hooks and shuttles
  • Arthroscopic knot pushers
  • Caspari suture punch (Biomet Sports Medicine, Inc, Warsaw, Ind)
  • Anchors
  • Bone punch
  • Tendon graspers
  • Arthroscopic elevators
  • Sling
  • Pain pump (optional)
ANATOMY
  • Supraspinatus muscle
    • Arises from supraspinatus fossa of scapula
    • Inserts into superior portion of greater tuberosity
    • Innervated by suprascapular nerve (C5)
    • Supplied by suprascapular artery (branch of the thyrocervical artery, which arises from subclavian artery)
  • Infraspinatus muscle
    • Arises from infraspinatus fossa of scapula
    • Inserts into middle portion of greater tuberosity
    • Innervated by suprascapular nerve (C5)
    • Supplied by suprascapular artery and circumflex scapular artery (branch of the subscapular artery)
    • Teres minor muscle
      • Arises from lateral scapula
      • Inserts into inferior portion of greater tuberosity
      • Innervated by axillary nerve
      • Supplied by circumflex scapular artery and posterior circumflex humeral artery (branch of the axillary artery)
      • Subscapularis muscle
        • Arises from subscapular fossa of scapula
        • Inserts into lesser tuberosity of humerus
        • Innervated by upper and lower subscapular nerve
        • Supplied by the circumflex scapular artery, the dorsal scapular artery, the suprascapular artery, and lateral thoracic artery
        • These muscles arise from the scapula, and their tendons blend with the adjacent shoulder capsule as they attach to the tuberosities of the humerus.
          • The infraspinatus and teres minor fuse near their musculotendinous junctions.
          • The supraspinatus and subscapularis tendons join as a sheath that surrounds the biceps tendon at the entrance of the bicipital groove.
          • The footprint has a mean minimal medial-to-lateral width of 14.7 mm. The mean medial-to-lateral insertion widths and anteroposterior distances vary by tendon.
            • Supraspinatus: 12.7 mm and 16.3 mm
            • Infraspinatus: 13.4 mm and 16.4 mm
            • Teres minor: 11.4 mm and 20.7 mm
            • Subscapularis: 17.9 mm and 24.3 mm
          • The mean anteroposterior distances of the supraspinatus, infraspinatus, teres minor, and subscapularis insertions were noted to be 1.63, 1.64, 2.07, and 2.43 cm, respectively.
          • Rotator cuff function includes rotating the humerus with respect to the scapula, compressing the humeral head into the glenoid fossa, and providing muscular balance.
          • The concavity-compression effect and mechanical depression of the humeral head counteract the superiorly directed force produced by the deltoid.

PROCEDURE
Sample excerpt does not include step-by-step text instructions for performing this procedure
Sign up for a FREE TRIAL to view full content
The full content of this section includes:
  • Step-by-step text instructions for performing the procedure
  • Clinical pearls providing practical clinical tips from medical experts
  • Patient safety guidelines consistent with Joint Commission and OHSA standards
  • Links to medical evidence and related procedures
<B>A</B>, Crescent tear. <B>B</B>, U-shaped tear. From Canale ST, Beaty JH (eds): Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics, 11th ed. Philadelphia, Elsevier, 2008.
Figure 7A, Crescent tear. B, U-shaped tear. From Canale ST, Beaty JH (eds): Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics, 11th ed. Philadelphia, Elsevier, 2008.

<B>A</B>, Use of handoff technique to pass No. 2 nonabsorbable suture through posterior leaf of tear and retrieve through the anterior leaf using penetrator and birdbeak instruments. <B>B</B>, Side-to-side margin convergence completed to reduce tear size for reapproximation to tuberosity with suture anchors. From Canale ST, Beaty JH (eds): Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics, 11th ed. Philadelphia, Elsevier, 2008.
Figure 8A, Use of handoff technique to pass No. 2 nonabsorbable suture through posterior leaf of tear and retrieve through the anterior leaf using penetrator and birdbeak instruments. B, Side-to-side margin convergence completed to reduce tear size for reapproximation to tuberosity with suture anchors. From Canale ST, Beaty JH (eds): Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics, 11th ed. Philadelphia, Elsevier, 2008.

Interval slide technique for repair of large rotator cuff tear. <B>A</B>, Basket punch inserted through the lateral subacromial portal to begin the interval release. <B>B</B>, Completed interval slide release, crescent tear. <B>C</B>, Completed interval slide release, longitudinal tear. Redrawn from Tauro JC: Arthroscopic repair of large rotator cuff tears using the interval slide technique. Arthroscopy 2004;20:13.
Figure 9 :  Interval slide technique for repair of large rotator cuff tear. A, Basket punch inserted through the lateral subacromial portal to begin the interval release. B, Completed interval slide release, crescent tear. C, Completed interval slide release, longitudinal tear. Redrawn from Tauro JC: Arthroscopic repair of large rotator cuff tears using the interval slide technique. Arthroscopy 2004;20:13.

Mobilization of subscapularis using arthroscopic elevator. <B>A</B>, Superior view. <B>B</B>, Anterior view. Redrawn from Burkhart SS, Tehrany AM: Arthroscopic subscapularis tendon repair: Technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy 2002;18:454.
Figure 11 :  Mobilization of subscapularis using arthroscopic elevator. A, Superior view. B, Anterior view. Redrawn from Burkhart SS, Tehrany AM: Arthroscopic subscapularis tendon repair: Technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy 2002;18:454.

Preparation of bone bed on lesser tuberosity using a high-speed burr (superior view). Redrawn from Burkhart SS, Tehrany AM: Arthroscopic subscapularis tendon repair: Technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy 2002;18:454.
Figure 12 :  Preparation of bone bed on lesser tuberosity using a high-speed burr (superior view). Redrawn from Burkhart SS, Tehrany AM: Arthroscopic subscapularis tendon repair: Technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy 2002;18:454.

Superior view of suture passage through subscapularis tendon as traction is maintained on the tendon. Redrawn from Burkhart SS, Tehrany AM: Arthroscopic subscapularis tendon repair: Technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy 2002;18:454.
Figure 13 :  Superior view of suture passage through subscapularis tendon as traction is maintained on the tendon. Redrawn from Burkhart SS, Tehrany AM: Arthroscopic subscapularis tendon repair: Technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy 2002;18:454.


POST-PROCEDURE
TECHNIQUES
  • Post-Procedure: Rotator Interval Capsule Closure (Treacy, Field, and Savoie)
  • Post-Procedure: Arthroscopic Side-to-Side Repair of Delamination Tears and Localized Partial-Thickness Articular-Side Cuff Tears
  • Post-Procedure: Arthroscopic Repair of Complete Rotator Cuff Tears
  • Post-Procedure: Repair of Large or Massive Contracted Tears Using the Interval Slide Technique (Tauro et al)
  • Post-Procedure: Subscapularis Tendon Repair

Post-Procedure: Rotator Interval Capsule Closure (Treacy, Field, and Savoie)

POST-PROCEDURE CARE
  • Immobilize in a sling for 3 to 6 weeks.
  • Avoid overhead motion or external rotation beyond neutral for 6 weeks.
  • Begin overhead motion at 6 weeks postoperatively.
  • Begin resisted isotonic strengthening at 10 weeks.
  • If the tear was small, an accelerated rehabilitation program may be used.
  • Progressive activities are incorporated as strength allows, and unrestricted activities usually are resumed 6 to 12 months after surgery.
COMPLICATIONS
  • Infection
  • Postoperative stiffness
  • Failure of repair
  • Complex regional pain syndrome
  • Deep vein thrombosis.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Arthroscopic repair has results and complication rates that are similar to those of open and mini-open techniques for partial to small full-thickness rotator cuff tears, but with lower gains in strength and motion and higher rates of recurrence for very large and massive tears.

OUTCOMES AND EVIDENCE
  • Brislin, Field, and Savoie: 11% complication rate for primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, including shoulder stiffness, failure of healing, infections, complex regional pain syndrome, and deep venous thrombosis
  • Cole et al: significant improvements in all outcome measures; 22% recurrence of tear, which correlated with patient age and extension of the tear to the supraspinatus
  • Kang et al: arthroscopic versus mini-open treatment of chronic small and medium rotator cuff tears; found that early functional outcomes were nearly equivalent, but the arthroscopic group had statistically significant improvement in pain scores at 3 months
  • Deutsch: 98% satisfaction with arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness (>50% thickness) tears
  • Verma et al: no statistical difference in outcome of arthroscopic repair versus mini-open repair
  • Lafosse et al: failure rate of 11% with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, lower with double-row than single-row fixation.
  • Franceschi et al: comparable clinical results between single-row and double-row fixation techniques at 2-year follow-up
  • Huijsmans et al: 91% excellent or good outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row fixation
  • Charousset et al: better tendon healing rates with double-row fixation, but no difference in clinical results.
  • Ma et al: cadaver study showed higher ultimate tensile load of double-row fixation compared to three different types of single-row fixation.
  • Andrews et al: 85% good and excellent results with arthroscopic debridement alone in young athletes
  • Budoff et al: 89% good to excellent results after arthroscopic debridement alone for partial-thickness rotator cuff tears at 5 years follow-up; this decreased to 81% after five years.
  • Esch: 76% with partial tears had satisfactory results with arthroscopic debridement and subacromial decompression.
  • Cordasco et al: no difference in outcome of arthroscopic acromioplasty and debridement in patients with partial-thickness rotator cuff tears compared to those without tear.
  • Weber: partial-thickness tears treated with arthroscopic debridement and acromioplasty versus arthroscopic acromioplasty and mini-open repair; the debridement and acromioplasty group had 14 good and no excellent results; the repair group had 28 good and 3 excellent results.
Procedure: Rotator Interval Capsule Closure (Treacy, Field, and Savoie)

Post-Procedure: Arthroscopic Side-to-Side Repair of Delamination Tears and Localized Partial-Thickness Articular-Side Cuff Tears

POST-PROCEDURE CARE
  • Immobilize in a sling for 3 to 6 weeks.
  • Avoid overhead motion or external rotation beyond neutral for 6 weeks.
  • Begin overhead motion at 6 weeks postoperatively.
  • Begin resisted isotonic strengthening at 10 weeks.
  • If the tear was small, an accelerated rehabilitation program may be used.
  • Progressive activities are incorporated as strength allows, and unrestricted activities usually are resumed 6 to 12 months after surgery.
COMPLICATIONS
  • Infection
  • Postoperative stiffness
  • Failure of repair
  • Complex regional pain syndrome
  • Deep vein thrombosis.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Arthroscopic repair has results and complication rates that are similar to those of open and mini-open techniques for partial to small full-thickness rotator cuff tears, but with lower gains in strength and motion and higher rates of recurrence for very large and massive tears.

OUTCOMES AND EVIDENCE
  • Brislin, Field, and Savoie: 11% complication rate for primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, including shoulder stiffness, failure of healing, infections, complex regional pain syndrome, and deep venous thrombosis
  • Cole et al: significant improvements in all outcome measures; 22% recurrence of tear, which correlated with patient age and extension of the tear to the supraspinatus
  • Kang et al: arthroscopic versus mini-open treatment of chronic small and medium rotator cuff tears; found that early functional outcomes were nearly equivalent, but the arthroscopic group had statistically significant improvement in pain scores at 3 months
  • Deutsch: 98% satisfaction with arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness (>50% thickness) tears
  • Verma et al: no statistical difference in outcome of arthroscopic repair versus mini-open repair
  • Lafosse et al: failure rate of 11% with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, lower with double-row than single-row fixation.
  • Franceschi et al: comparable clinical results between single-row and double-row fixation techniques at 2-year follow-up
  • Huijsmans et al: 91% excellent or good outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row fixation
  • Charousset et al: better tendon healing rates with double-row fixation, but no difference in clinical results.
  • Ma et al: cadaver study showed higher ultimate tensile load of double-row fixation compared to three different types of single-row fixation.
  • Andrews et al: 85% good and excellent results with arthroscopic debridement alone in young athletes
  • Budoff et al: 89% good to excellent results after arthroscopic debridement alone for partial-thickness rotator cuff tears at 5 years follow-up; this decreased to 81% after five years.
  • Esch: 76% with partial tears had satisfactory results with arthroscopic debridement and subacromial decompression.
  • Cordasco et al: no difference in outcome of arthroscopic acromioplasty and debridement in patients with partial-thickness rotator cuff tears compared to those without tear.
  • Weber: partial-thickness tears treated with arthroscopic debridement and acromioplasty versus arthroscopic acromioplasty and mini-open repair; the debridement and acromioplasty group had 14 good and no excellent results; the repair group had 28 good and 3 excellent results.
Procedure: Arthroscopic Side-to-Side Repair of Delamination Tears and Localized Partial-Thickness Articular-Side Cuff Tears

Post-Procedure: Arthroscopic Repair of Complete Rotator Cuff Tears

POST-PROCEDURE CARE
  • Immobilize in a sling for 3 to 6 weeks.
  • Avoid overhead motion or external rotation beyond neutral for 6 weeks.
  • Begin overhead motion at 6 weeks postoperatively.
  • Begin resisted isotonic strengthening at 10 weeks.
  • If the tear was small, an accelerated rehabilitation program may be used.
  • Progressive activities are incorporated as strength allows, and unrestricted activities usually are resumed 6 to 12 months after surgery.
COMPLICATIONS
  • Infection
  • Postoperative stiffness
  • Failure of repair
  • Complex regional pain syndrome
  • Deep vein thrombosis.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Arthroscopic repair has results and complication rates that are similar to those of open and mini-open techniques for partial to small full-thickness rotator cuff tears, but with lower gains in strength and motion and higher rates of recurrence for very large and massive tears.

OUTCOMES AND EVIDENCE
  • Brislin, Field, and Savoie: 11% complication rate for primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, including shoulder stiffness, failure of healing, infections, complex regional pain syndrome, and deep venous thrombosis
  • Cole et al: significant improvements in all outcome measures; 22% recurrence of tear, which correlated with patient age and extension of the tear to the supraspinatus
  • Kang et al: arthroscopic versus mini-open treatment of chronic small and medium rotator cuff tears; found that early functional outcomes were nearly equivalent, but the arthroscopic group had statistically significant improvement in pain scores at 3 months
  • Deutsch: 98% satisfaction with arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness (>50% thickness) tears
  • Verma et al: no statistical difference in outcome of arthroscopic repair versus mini-open repair
  • Lafosse et al: failure rate of 11% with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, lower with double-row than single-row fixation.
  • Franceschi et al: comparable clinical results between single-row and double-row fixation techniques at 2-year follow-up
  • Huijsmans et al: 91% excellent or good outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row fixation
  • Charousset et al: better tendon healing rates with double-row fixation, but no difference in clinical results.
  • Ma et al: cadaver study showed higher ultimate tensile load of double-row fixation compared to three different types of single-row fixation.
  • Andrews et al: 85% good and excellent results with arthroscopic debridement alone in young athletes
  • Budoff et al: 89% good to excellent results after arthroscopic debridement alone for partial-thickness rotator cuff tears at 5 years follow-up; this decreased to 81% after five years.
  • Esch: 76% with partial tears had satisfactory results with arthroscopic debridement and subacromial decompression.
  • Cordasco et al: no difference in outcome of arthroscopic acromioplasty and debridement in patients with partial-thickness rotator cuff tears compared to those without tear.
  • Weber: partial-thickness tears treated with arthroscopic debridement and acromioplasty versus arthroscopic acromioplasty and mini-open repair; the debridement and acromioplasty group had 14 good and no excellent results; the repair group had 28 good and 3 excellent results.
Procedure: Arthroscopic Repair of Complete Rotator Cuff Tears

Post-Procedure: Repair of Large or Massive Contracted Tears Using the Interval Slide Technique (Tauro et al)

POST-PROCEDURE CARE
  • Immobilize in a sling for 3 to 6 weeks.
  • Avoid overhead motion or external rotation beyond neutral for 6 weeks.
  • Begin overhead motion at 6 weeks postoperatively.
  • Begin resisted isotonic strengthening at 10 weeks.
  • If the tear was small, an accelerated rehabilitation program may be used.
  • Progressive activities are incorporated as strength allows, and unrestricted activities usually are resumed 6 to 12 months after surgery.
COMPLICATIONS
  • Infection
  • Postoperative stiffness
  • Failure of repair
  • Complex regional pain syndrome
  • Deep vein thrombosis.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Arthroscopic repair has results and complication rates that are similar to those of open and mini-open techniques for partial to small full-thickness rotator cuff tears, but with lower gains in strength and motion and higher rates of recurrence for very large and massive tears.

OUTCOMES AND EVIDENCE
  • Brislin, Field, and Savoie: 11% complication rate for primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, including shoulder stiffness, failure of healing, infections, complex regional pain syndrome, and deep venous thrombosis
  • Cole et al: significant improvements in all outcome measures; 22% recurrence of tear, which correlated with patient age and extension of the tear to the supraspinatus
  • Kang et al: arthroscopic versus mini-open treatment of chronic small and medium rotator cuff tears; found that early functional outcomes were nearly equivalent, but the arthroscopic group had statistically significant improvement in pain scores at 3 months
  • Deutsch: 98% satisfaction with arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness (>50% thickness) tears
  • Verma et al: no statistical difference in outcome of arthroscopic repair versus mini-open repair
  • Lafosse et al: failure rate of 11% with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, lower with double-row than single-row fixation.
  • Franceschi et al: comparable clinical results between single-row and double-row fixation techniques at 2-year follow-up
  • Huijsmans et al: 91% excellent or good outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row fixation
  • Charousset et al: better tendon healing rates with double-row fixation, but no difference in clinical results.
  • Ma et al: cadaver study showed higher ultimate tensile load of double-row fixation compared to three different types of single-row fixation.
  • Andrews et al: 85% good and excellent results with arthroscopic debridement alone in young athletes
  • Budoff et al: 89% good to excellent results after arthroscopic debridement alone for partial-thickness rotator cuff tears at 5 years follow-up; this decreased to 81% after five years.
  • Esch: 76% with partial tears had satisfactory results with arthroscopic debridement and subacromial decompression.
  • Cordasco et al: no difference in outcome of arthroscopic acromioplasty and debridement in patients with partial-thickness rotator cuff tears compared to those without tear.
  • Weber: partial-thickness tears treated with arthroscopic debridement and acromioplasty versus arthroscopic acromioplasty and mini-open repair; the debridement and acromioplasty group had 14 good and no excellent results; the repair group had 28 good and 3 excellent results.
Procedure: Repair of Large or Massive Contracted Tears Using the Interval Slide Technique (Tauro et al)
Post-Procedure: Subscapularis Tendon Repair
POST-PROCEDURE CARE
  • Immobilize in a sling for 3 to 6 weeks.
  • Avoid overhead motion or external rotation beyond neutral for 6 weeks.
  • Begin overhead motion at 6 weeks postoperatively.
  • Begin resisted isotonic strengthening at 10 weeks.
  • If the tear was small, an accelerated rehabilitation program may be used.
  • Progressive activities are incorporated as strength allows, and unrestricted activities usually are resumed 6 to 12 months after surgery.
COMPLICATIONS
  • Infection
  • Postoperative stiffness
  • Failure of repair
  • Complex regional pain syndrome
  • Deep vein thrombosis.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Arthroscopic repair has results and complication rates that are similar to those of open and mini-open techniques for partial to small full-thickness rotator cuff tears, but with lower gains in strength and motion and higher rates of recurrence for very large and massive tears.

OUTCOMES AND EVIDENCE
  • Brislin, Field, and Savoie: 11% complication rate for primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, including shoulder stiffness, failure of healing, infections, complex regional pain syndrome, and deep venous thrombosis
  • Cole et al: significant improvements in all outcome measures; 22% recurrence of tear, which correlated with patient age and extension of the tear to the supraspinatus
  • Kang et al: arthroscopic versus mini-open treatment of chronic small and medium rotator cuff tears; found that early functional outcomes were nearly equivalent, but the arthroscopic group had statistically significant improvement in pain scores at 3 months
  • Deutsch: 98% satisfaction with arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness (>50% thickness) tears
  • Verma et al: no statistical difference in outcome of arthroscopic repair versus mini-open repair
  • Lafosse et al: failure rate of 11% with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, lower with double-row than single-row fixation.
  • Franceschi et al: comparable clinical results between single-row and double-row fixation techniques at 2-year follow-up
  • Huijsmans et al: 91% excellent or good outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row fixation
  • Charousset et al: better tendon healing rates with double-row fixation, but no difference in clinical results.
  • Ma et al: cadaver study showed higher ultimate tensile load of double-row fixation compared to three different types of single-row fixation.
  • Andrews et al: 85% good and excellent results with arthroscopic debridement alone in young athletes
  • Budoff et al: 89% good to excellent results after arthroscopic debridement alone for partial-thickness rotator cuff tears at 5 years follow-up; this decreased to 81% after five years.
  • Esch: 76% with partial tears had satisfactory results with arthroscopic debridement and subacromial decompression.
  • Cordasco et al: no difference in outcome of arthroscopic acromioplasty and debridement in patients with partial-thickness rotator cuff tears compared to those without tear.
  • Weber: partial-thickness tears treated with arthroscopic debridement and acromioplasty versus arthroscopic acromioplasty and mini-open repair; the debridement and acromioplasty group had 14 good and no excellent results; the repair group had 28 good and 3 excellent results.
Procedure: Subscapularis Tendon Repair
About Procedures Consult | Help | Press Room | Contact Us | Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy | Send Feedback
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.