Footprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial

dc.contributor.authorRuiz Iban, Miguel Angel
dc.contributor.authorSanchez Alepuz, Eduardo
dc.contributor.authorDiaz Heredia, Jorge
dc.contributor.authorHachem, Abdul-Ilah
dc.contributor.authorEzagüi Bentolila, Leon
dc.contributor.authorCalvo, Angel
dc.contributor.authorVerdú, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorRus Aznar, Ignacio de
dc.contributor.authorSoler Romagosa, Francesc
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-15T11:46:27Z
dc.date.available2021-02-15T11:46:27Z
dc.date.issued2020-06-01
dc.date.updated2021-02-12T11:28:12Z
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To evaluate if adding nanofractures to the footprint of a supraspinatus tear repair would have any effect in the outcomes at one-year follow-up. Methods: Multicentric, triple-blinded, randomized trial with 12-months follow-up. Subjects with isolated symptomatic reparable supraspinatus tears smaller than 3 cm and without grade 4 fatty infiltration were included. These were randomized to two groups: In the Control group an arthroscopic supraspinatus repair was performed; in the Nanofracture group the footprint was additionally prepared with nanofractures (1 mm wide, 9 mm deep microfractures). Clinical evaluation was done with Constant score, EQ-5D-3L, and Brief Pain Inventory. The primary outcome was the retear rate in MRI at 12-months follow-up. Secondary outcomes were: characteristics of the retear (at the footprint or at the musculotendinous junction) and clinical outcomes. Results: Seventy-one subjects were randomized. Two were lost to follow-up, leaving 69 participants available for assessment at 12-months follow-up (33 in the Control group and 36 in the Nanofracture Group). The Nanofracture group had lower retear rates than the Control group (7/36 [19.4%] vs 14/33 [42.4%], differences significant, p = 0.038). Retear rates at the musculotendinous junction were similar but the Nanofracture group had better tendon healing rates to the bone (34/36 [94.4%] vs. 24/33 [66.71%], p = 0.014). Clinically both groups had significant improvements, but no differences were found between groups. Conclusion: Adding nanofractures at the footprint during an isolated supraspinatus repair lowers in half the retear rate at 12-months follow-up. This is due to improved healing at the footprint.
dc.format.extent8 p.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.pmid32488368
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/173937
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSpringer Nature
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06073-7
dc.relation.ispartofKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2020
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06073-7
dc.rightscc by (c) Ruiz Ibán et al., 2020
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
dc.sourceArticles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))
dc.subject.classificationArtroscòpia
dc.subject.classificationEspatlla
dc.subject.classificationFractures
dc.subject.otherArthroscopy
dc.subject.otherShoulder
dc.subject.otherFractures
dc.titleFootprint preparation with nanofractures in a supraspinatus repair cuts in half the retear rate at 1-year follow-up. A randomized controlled trial
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Fitxers

Paquet original

Mostrant 1 - 1 de 1
Carregant...
Miniatura
Nom:
RuizIbán2020_Article_FootprintPreparationWithNanofr.pdf
Mida:
879.23 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format