Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach

doi:10.5312/wjo.v12.i12.991

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 12, Issue 12

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (3565)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, WORD series, HTML series, Figures (1-1) series, Tables (1-2) series.

Item

Count

PDF

244

WORD

HTML

1884

Figures (1-1)

236

Tables (1-2)

235

Sum=2672

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

292

Download

601

Sum=893

Dec 18, 2021 (publication date) through Nov 3, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (8)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Orthopedics

ISSN

2218-5836

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Case Control Study

World J Orthop. Dec 18, 2021; 12(12): 991-1000
Published online Dec 18, 2021. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v12.i12.991

Table 2 Clinical, self-reported health and biomechanical outcomes according to the surgical treatment

	AA (n = 50)	MO (n = 38)	P value
Clinical score
VAS	3 (2.62)	3.37 (2.97)	0.78
CONSTANT	65 (10.32)	75.12 (17.38)	0.14
DASH	24.12 (20.59)	21.63 (23)	0.81
Self-reported health measures
SF-12_PH	43.17 (9.41)	43.5 (10.34)	0.94
SF-12_ME	48.86 (9.86)	43.63 (14.16)	0.37
Biomechanical tests
ROM_ABD	110.88 (21.9)	120.76 (27.91)	0.41
RMS_ABD,F,TRAP	125.78 (77.49)	54.52 (58.25)	0.05¹
RMS_ABD,R,TRAP	59.5 (30.42)	28.34 (26.39)	0.04¹
PERC_ABD,BBCL	8.23 (2.64)	19.23 (12.15)	0.04¹
PERC_ABD,TRAP	35.99 (14.39)	19.57 (15.97)	0.04¹
ROM_FLEX	127.95 (25.55)	141.75 (33.51)	0.34
VEL_FLEX,F	73.97 (31.74)	46.26 (16.04)	0.03¹
VEL_FLEX,R	88.65 (30.9)	56.13 (23.72)	0.03¹
RMS_FLEX,F,TRAP	91.19 (49.57)	41.35 (45.43)	0.04¹
RMS_FLEX,R,TRAP	47.15 (24.04)	22.99 (19.58)	0.04¹
PERC_FLEX,DLTA	43.18 (6.9)	58.65 (9.6)	< 0.01¹
PERC_FLEX,TRAP	29.97 (11.21)	14.2 (9.04)	< 0.01¹

¹Significant differences. ABD: Abduction; F: Forward; R: Return; BBCL: Biceps brachialis caput longus; CMS: Constant-Murley score; DASH: Disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand; DLTA: Deltoid anterior; ME: Mental components; PERC: Peak dynamic value of the cycle; PH: Physical component; RMS: Root mean square; ROM: Range of motion; SF-12: The 12-item short form survey; TRAP: Upper trapezius; VAS: Visual analogic scale; VEL: Velocity; FLEX: Flexion.

Citation: Solarino G, Bortone I, Vicenti G, Bizzoca D, Coviello M, Maccagnano G, Moretti B, D'Angelo F. Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach. World J Orthop 2021; 12(12): 991-1000
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v12/i12/991.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i12.991