Double row repair: is it worth the hassle?

Area of Science:

• Orthopedic Surgery
• Sports Medicine
• Biomechanical Engineering

Background:

• Rotator cuff disease management involves surgical repair to restore tendon-bone integrity.
• Single-row repair is common, while double-row repair aims for a more anatomic footprint restoration.
• Arthroscopic and open repair methods yield comparable functional results.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the clinical and functional outcomes of single-row versus double-row rotator cuff repair techniques.
• To evaluate the imaging-based anatomical restoration provided by double-row repair.
• To assess the scientific basis for preferring single-row or double-row repair in rotator cuff tears.

Main Methods:

• Review of studies comparing open/mini-open and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.
• Analysis of imaging assessments for anatomical footprint restoration.
• Evaluation of clinical and functional outcomes using rating scales for different rotator cuff tear sizes.

Main Results:

• Double-row repair demonstrates more anatomic restoration of the rotator cuff footprint on initial imaging.
• No significant differences in clinical or functional outcomes were observed between single-row and double-row repairs across all tear sizes.
• Minimal differences were measured on clinical and functional rating scales between the two techniques.

Conclusions:

• The superiority of double-row repair over single-row repair for rotator cuff tears is not definitively established based on current clinical and functional data.
• The choice between single-row and double-row repair may not significantly impact patient outcomes for all rotator cuff tear types.
• Further research is needed to clarify the indications and benefits of each repair technique.