IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0222953.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of arthroscopic vs. mini-open rotator cuff repair on function, pain & range of motion. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Goris Nazari
  • Joy C MacDermid
  • Dianne Bryant
  • Neha Dewan
  • George S Athwal

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair on function, pain and range of motion at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow ups. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Setting: Clinical setting. Participants: Patients 18 years and older with a rotator cuff tear. Intervention/Comparison: Arthroscopic/mini-open rotator cuff repair surgery followed by post operative rehabilitation. Main outcome measures: Function and pain. Results: Six RCTs (n = 670) were included. The pooled results, demonstrated no significant difference between arthroscopic and mini open approach to rotator cuff repair on function (very low quality, 4 RCTs, 495 patients, SMD 0.00, 3-month; very low quality, 4 RCTs, 495 patients, SMD -0.01, 6-month; very low quality, 3 RCTs, 462 patients, SMD -0.09, 12-months). For pain, the pooled results, were not statistically different between groups (very low quality, 3 RCTs, 254 patients, MD -0.21, 3-month; very low quality, 3 RCTs, 254 patients, MD -0.03, 6-month; very low quality, 2 RCTs, 194 patients, MD -0.35, 12-months). Conclusion: The effects of arthroscopic compared to mini-open rotator cuff repair, on function, pain and range of motion are too small to be clinically important at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow ups.

Suggested Citation

  • Goris Nazari & Joy C MacDermid & Dianne Bryant & Neha Dewan & George S Athwal, 2019. "Effects of arthroscopic vs. mini-open rotator cuff repair on function, pain & range of motion. A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-19, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222953
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222953
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222953
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222953&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0222953?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liancheng Shan & Dong Fu & Kai Chen & Zhengdong Cai & Guodong Li, 2014. "All-Arthroscopic versus Mini-Open Repair of Small to Large Sized Rotator Cuff Tears: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-7, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222953. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.