Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 2, 2026

05:25
Knotless Independent Double-Row Repair and Biceps Augmentation for Anterosuperior Rotator Cuff Tears
Published on: January 23, 2026
Platelet-Rich Plasma and Bone Marrow Stimulation in Double-Row Rotator Cuff Repair Does Not Improve Clinical Outcomes
Hsien-Hao Chang1,2, Yong-Min Chun2, Sung-Jae Kim2
1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea.
Summary
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) augmentation significantly reduced retear rates in double-row suture bridge (DRSB) rotator cuff repair compared to conventional repair or bone marrow stimulation (BMS). Clinical outcomes and range of motion were similar across all groups at two years.
Area of Science:
- Orthopedic Surgery
- Sports Medicine
- Regenerative Medicine
Background:
- Rotator cuff tears are common, often treated with arthroscopic repair.
- Double-row suture bridge (DRSB) repair is a standard technique.
- Augmentation with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) or bone marrow stimulation (BMS) aims to improve healing and reduce retears.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare clinical and radiologic outcomes of arthroscopic DRSB rotator cuff repair.
- To evaluate the efficacy of PRP and BMS augmentation versus conventional DRSB repair.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective comparative study of 141 patients (46 per group) with medium-to-large rotator cuff tears.
- Propensity score matching based on age, tear size, fatty infiltration, and smoking status.
- Assessment of clinical outcomes (VAS, ASES, SSV, UCLA, ROM) and structural integrity (retear rates) at 2-year follow-up.
Main Results:
- No significant differences in 2-year clinical scores or range of motion among the three groups.
- Significantly lower retear rates in the DRSB with PRP group (10.9%) compared to DRSB alone (30.4%) and DRSB with BMS (32.6%).
- PRP augmentation was an independent protective factor against retear; BMS did not show significant benefit.
Conclusions:
- DRSB repair augmented with PRP demonstrated lower retear rates compared to conventional DRSB or DRSB with BMS.
- BMS augmentation did not reduce retear rates compared to conventional DRSB repair.
- Clinical outcomes and range of motion were comparable across all groups at two-year follow-up.
