Arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: a comparison of clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction

This study compares the results of arthroscopic and arthroscopically assisted mini-open rotator cuff repair in a series of 84 patients who underwent repair of small, medium, or large tears between March 1997 and September 2001 with at least 2 years of follow-up. There were 42 arthroscopic repairs and 42 mini-open repairs. Of the patients, 81 (96.4%) had good or excellent UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) scores (40 arthroscopic repairs [95.2%] and 41 mini-open repairs [97.6%]); there were 2 fair results and 1 poor outcome. The ASES (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons) scores averaged 91.1 for the arthroscopic group and 90.2 for the mini-open group (P > .05). Six patients required further surgery (three from the arthroscopic group and three from the mini-open group). Of 84 patients, 83 (98.8%) reported being satisfied with the procedure. At greater than 2 years of follow-up, arthroscopic and mini-open rotator cuff repairs produced similar results for small, medium, and large rotator cuff tears with equivalent patient satisfaction rates.