Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 4, 2025
Development of a Rabbit Chronic-Like Rotator Cuff Injury Model for Study of Fibrosis and Muscular Fatty Degeneration
Published on: March 31, 2023
Effect of Bone Marrow Stimulation on Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Kyun-Ho Shin1, Jin-Uk Kim1, Il-Tae Jang2
1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Incheon Nanoori Hospital, Incheon, South Korea.
Background:
Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) is a common orthopaedic procedure, but it has a high rate of retears that can negatively affect the functional outcomes. Bone marrow stimulation (BMS) has been suggested as an additional treatment to improve the outcomes of RCR.
Purpose:
To compare the effectiveness of the BMS procedure during RCR with conventional RCR.
Study Design:
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2.
Methods:
A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, on March 1, 2023, for studies comparing postoperative retear rates and functional outcomes between patients who underwent primary arthroscopic RCR with and without the BMS procedure. Only level 1 and 2 randomized controlled trials with a minimum 12-month follow-up were included. The primary outcomes were retear rates and functional outcomes as measured by the Constant; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES); and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) scores and by postoperative range of motion. Subgroup analyses were performed based on repair technique (single-row repair vs double-row or suture-bridge repair). The standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) were utilized to synthesize continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. Homogeneity was evaluated using the chi-square test and I2 statistic.
Results:
The literature search yielded 661 articles, of which 6 studies (522 patients; 261 with BMS, 261 without BMS) met the eligibility criteria. The combined analysis showed no significant decrease in retear rates with the utilization of the BMS procedure during RCR (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.03; P = .07; I2 = 24%). There was no significant intergroup difference in functional outcomes (Constant score: SMD, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.31; P = .13; I2 = 0%; ASES score: SMD, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.20 to 0.28; P = .73; I2 = 0%; UCLA score: SMD, -0.13; 95% CI, -0.50 to 0.23; P = .47; I2 = 0%). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences in postoperative retear risk or total Constant score according to the repair technique.
Conclusion:
Based on the available evidence, this systematic review did not find a significant benefit of the BMS procedure at the footprint during arthroscopic RCR compared with conventional RCR in terms of retear rates and functional outcomes at short-term follow-up.
