Background: The trial aimed to prospectively compare the functional outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using transosseous-equivalent double-row (TEDR) or single-row (SR) suture anchor techniques at 3 years postoperatively for both large (>3 cm) and small (<3 cm) tears. Methods: Eighty patients with a symptomatic and magnetic resonance imaging (MRD-proven full-thickness rotator cuff tear, who had failed conservative management of at least 6 months' duration and who had a complete passive range of motion of the affected shoulder, were enrolled in the trial. Patients were randomized to TEDR repair (n - 40) or SR repair (n 40). Subgroup analysis was conducted for tears <3 cm (TEDR n = 17, SR n = 19) and tears >3 cm (TEDR n = 23, SR n = 21). Primary outcomes included the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score, and the Constant-Murley score (CMS). The secondary outcomes included a 0-100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, range of motion (ROM), and EQ-5D scores. All patients completed a follow-up of 3 years. Results: There was a significant difference in the mean OSS postoperative score for tears >3 cm (P = .01) and mean improvement from baseline in the TEDR group (P = .001). For tears >3 cm, mean postoperative scores were also significantly higher in the TEDR group for UCLA (P = .015) and CMS (P = .001). Post hoc testing showed that the differences between these groups was statistically significant (P < .05). For tears <3 cm, a significant postoperative difference in favor of SR repair was seen in the mean CMSs (P = .011), and post hoc testing showed that the difference was statistically significant (P = .015). No significant difference was seen with mean postoperative OSS or UCLA, and post hoc testing did not show a statistically significant difference between groups. Conclusions: TEDR repair showed improved functional outcomes for tears >3 cm compared with SR repair. For tears <3 cm, no clear benefit was seen with either technique. (C) 2020 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. All rights reserved.

Background: After isolated subscapularis repair. improvement in shoulder function has been reported at short-term review. The purpose of this study was to determine whether arthroscopic subscapularis repair provides durable improvement in objective and subjective shoulder function with a low structural retear rate. Methods: All patients treated with arthroscopic repair of an isolated subscapularis tear between August 2003 and December 2012 with a minimum follow-up period of 4.6 years were identified from our database. A number of patients in our study cohort underwent a prior complete midterm assessment, which allowed a subgroup analysis to detect changes in structural integrity and corresponding function. Clinical and radio-graphic outcomes, including outcomes on conventional radiography and magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound, were assessed. Results: The study enrolled 36 shoulders with a mean patient age of 57.7 years (range, 31-75 years; standard deviation. 10.6 years). The mean follow-up period was 8.6 years (range, 4.6-13.9 years; standard deviation, 2.44 years). Internal rotation to the thoracic vertebrae was achieved in 94% of cases and was significantly improved (P < .001) compared with the preoperative situation. The mean relative Constant score improved from 68% preoperatively to 93% at final follow-up (P < .001). Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation showed a rerupture rate of 2.7% (1 of 36 shoulders). Twenty patients underwent previous complete midterm assessment (mean, 2.9 years; range. 14.5 years), with comparisons between midterm and long-term follow-up showing comparable results without statistically significant deterioration. Conclusions: Functional and subjective improvements in shoulder function are maintained at a mean follow-up of more than 8 years after isolated subscapularis repair and are associated with a low structural failure rate of the repair. (C) 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND:The purpose of this paper was to determine whether acromial morphology influences anteroposterior shoulder stability. We hypothesized that a more horizontal and higher position of the acromion in the sagittal plane would be associated with posterior instability. METHODS:In this retrospective study, patients with unidirectional posterior instability were age and sex-matched to a cohort of patients with unidirectional anterior instability. Both cohorts were compared with a control group of patients with no instability and no degenerative glenohumeral (rotator cuff and/or joint surface) or acromial changes. Measurements on radiographs included posterior acromial tilt, anterior and posterior acromial coverage (AAC and PAC), posterior acromial height (PAH), and the critical shoulder angle (CSA). RESULTS:The number of patients enrolled in each instability group was 41, based on a priori power analysis. The control group consisted of 53 shoulders. Of the measured anatomic factors, PAH showed the most significant association with posterior instability (odds ratio [OR] = 1.8; p < 0.001) in the logistic regression model. PAH was significantly greater in the posterior instability group compared with the anterior instability group (30.9 versus 19.5 mm; p < 0.001). With a cutoff value of PAH of 23 mm, the OR for posterior instability was 39. Shoulders with posterior instability were also significantly different from normal shoulders with regard to PAH (p < 0.001), AAC (p < 0.001), and PAC (p < 0.001) whereas, in the shoulders with anterior instability, all of these values except the AAC (p = 0.011) did not differ from those of normal shoulders. CONCLUSIONS:Specific acromial morphology is significantly associated with the direction of glenohumeral instability. In shoulders with posterior instability, the acromion is situated higher and is oriented more horizontally in the sagittal plane than in normal shoulders and those with anterior instability; this acromial position may provide less osseous restraint against posterior humeral head translation. A steep "Swiss chalet roof-type" acromion virtually excluded recurrent posterior instability in an albeit relatively small cohort of patients. Additional investigation is needed to determine the relevance of these findings for future treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Passive glenohumeral range of motion may be characteristically limited to specific shoulder pathologies. While pain associated with loss of range of passive external glenohumeral rotation is recognized as a salient feature in adhesive capsulitis, restriction of glenohumeral range of motion in calcific tendinitis of the supraspinatus tendon has never been studied. Hypothesis: On the basis of clinical observation, we hypothesized that calcific tendinitis of the supraspinatus tendon is associated with loss of passive glenohumeral abduction without loss of external rotation. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Ranges of passive glenohumeral rotation and abduction, which are measured with a standardized protocol in our institution, were retrospectively reviewed and compared for patients diagnosed with either adhesive capsulitis or calcific tendinitis of the supraspinatus tendon. A total of 57 patients met the inclusion criteria for the calcific tendinitis, and 77 met the inclusion criteria for the adhesive capsulitis group. Results: When compared with the contralateral, unaffected shoulder, glenohumeral abduction in the calcific tendinitis group was restricted by a median of 10° (interquartile range [IQR], –20° to –5°) as opposed to glenohumeral external rotation, which was not restricted at all (median, 0°; IQR, 0° to 0°). The adhesive capsulitis group showed a median restriction of glenohumeral abduction of 40° (IQR, –50° to –30°) and a median restriction of passive glenohumeral external rotation of 40° (IQR, –60° to –30°). Conclusion: Calcific tendinitis of the supraspinatus does not typically cause loss of external rotation but is frequently associated with mild isolated restriction of abduction. This finding can be used to clinically differentiate adhesive capsulitis from calcific tendinitis.