title: Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without acromioplasty in the treatment of full-thickness rotator cuff tears: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The primary objective of this prospective randomized controlled trial was to compare functional and quality-of-life indices and rates of revision surgery in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without acromioplasty.
  
  
  METHODS
  Eighty-six patients consented and were randomly assigned intraoperatively to one of two study groups, and sixty-eight of them completed the study. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index. Secondary outcome measures included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder assessment form and a count of revisions required in each group. Outcome measures were completed preoperatively and at three, six, twelve, eighteen, and twenty-four months after surgery.
  
  
  RESULTS
  WORC and ASES scores improved significantly in each group over time (p < 0.001). There were no differences in WORC or ASES scores between the groups that had arthroscopic cuff repair with or without acromioplasty at any time point. There were no differences in scores on the basis of acromion type, nor were any interaction effects identified between group and acromion type. Four participants (9%) in the group that had arthroscopic cuff repair alone, one with a Type-2 and three with a Type-3 acromion, required additional surgery by the twenty-four-month time point. The number of patients who required additional surgery was greater (p = 0.05) in the group that had arthroscopic cuff repair alone than in the group that had arthroscopic cuff repair and acromioplasty.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our findings are consistent with previous research reports in which there was no difference in functional and quality-of-life indices for patients who had rotator cuff repair with or without acromioplasty. The higher reoperation rate was found in the group without acromioplasty. Further study that includes follow-up imaging and patient-reported outcomes over a greater follow-up period is needed.
authors: Section of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Pan Am Clinic/University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3M 3E4, Canada. pmacdonald@panamclinic.com
authors: Peter
authors: P
authors: MacDonald
authors: Sheila
authors: S
authors: McRae
authors: Jeffrey
authors: J
authors: Leiter
authors: Randy
authors: R
authors: Mascarenhas
authors: Peter
authors: P
authors: Lapner
mesh_terms: D000173:Acromioclavicular Joint / Q000293:injuries* / Q000601:surgery; D000174:Acromion / Q000601:surgery*; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001178:Arthroplasty / Q000379:methods; D001182:Arthroscopy / Q000379:methods*; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D015601:Injury Severity Score; D008297:Male; D010147:Pain Measurement; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000503:physiopathology; D011446:Prospective Studies; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular / Q000502:physiology; D020127:Recovery of Function; D012016:Reference Values; D018570:Risk Assessment; D017006:Rotator Cuff / Q000601:surgery*; D000070636:Rotator Cuff Injuries; D016896:Treatment Outcome