A Mechanistic Classification for Superior Labral Injuries Guides Operative Management.

Journal and index pages often block iframe embedding. This reader keeps the evidence details in Orthonotes and leaves the source page one click away.

Abstract

[Indexed for MEDLINE] Conflict of interest statement: Disclosures The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: D.C.T. is a board or committee member of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine; has received other financial or material support from Arthrex, Breg, DJOrtho, Mitek, and Smith & Nephew; has received IP royalties from DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company; and has received research support from Smith & Nephew. B.C.L. is a board or committee member of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Association of North America, has received research support from Arthrex and Wright Medical Technology, and is a paid consultant for Miach and DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company. T.L. is a board or committee member of the Arthroscopy Association of North America, is a paid presenter or speaker for Lima, is a paid consultant for Lima and Stryker, has received other financial or material support from Lima, and has received research support from Arthrex and Wright Medical Technology. J.R.W. is a board or committee member of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Association of North America, is a paid presenter or speaker for Arthrex and Vericel, is a paid consultant for Geistlich, is a member of the editorial or governing board for Ortho Info, and has stock or stock options with Viewf. C.S.K. has received consultation or advisory fees from Acumed, Restore3d, and Smith & Nephew and has stock or stock options with GE Healthcare, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, and Pfizer. J.F.D. is a board member of the AAOS, American Journal of Sports Medicine, American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy Association of North America, and Society of Military Orthopaedic Surgeons. A.P.T. is a board or committee member of AAOS and the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine and has received other financial or material support from Arthrex, Breg, Mitek, Smith & Nephew, and Stryker. All other authors (E.T.H., J.T-K., S.G.L., B.S.C., Z.W.H., A.M.M., J.M.L., L.E.M., T.R.D., K.E.B.) declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. 9. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2006 Nov-Dec;144(6):R103-10; quiz R111-5. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-955972. [Rupture of the rotator cuff]. [Article in German] Wurmig C(1). Author information: (1)Orthopädisches Spital Wien-Speising, Wien, Austria. christian.wurnig@oss.at Reconstructive surgery of rotator cuff tears tries to restore a stable center of rotation in the shoulder joint. Both the classic technique of open surgery and the arthroscopic technique are employed to reconstruct the rotator cuff. This review tries to answer the question which of both surgical techniques is superior by a review of the literature. The recent literature demonstrates a shorter follow-up period for publications concerning arthroscopic reconstruction (mean 3 years) in comparison to open surgery, where follow-up is in mean 6.2 years. Overall arthroscopic surgery achieves good and excellent results between 68 to 96%, open reconstruction between 77 and 91%. Longevity of reconstructed rotator cuffs especially in large tears seems to be significantly shorter if an arthroscopic technique was used. Several authors mentioned size of tear as a major factor influencing longevity. However in patients treated arthroscopically despite rerupture of the rotor cuff patient's satisfaction and clinical outcome is still very good in short-term follow-up. In case of a complete tear of one tendon of the rotator cuff the arthroscopic technique seems to be superior. If large tears occur (two or three tendons) the open surgical technique may be more reliable with regard to longevity of the repair. For the future it seems necessary to obtain long-term results to be able to compare both principles of reconstruction of the rotator cuff. Furthermore these future studies should include quality of life scores as measurements tools besides the already employed parameters as size of the tear, age at surgery, patient satisfaction and outcome scores. DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-955972