Abstract
BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction (ASCR) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have both shown favorable outcomes in patients with irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCTs). PURPOSE: To (1) compare the clinical outcomes of ASCR versus RSA in patients aged ≥65 years with IRCTs and (2) compare serial changes in clinical outcomes between treatment groups. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: This study included patients with IRCTs without glenohumeral osteoarthritis who underwent either ASCR or RSA between March 2013 and December 2020 and had at least 2 years of follow-up data. We assessed active range of motion, a visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score at the preoperative, short-term (postoperative 6-12 months), and final follow-up times. RESULTS: In total, 64 patients (ASCR, 31 patients; RSA, 33 patients) were included. The mean age of patients was 71.3 ± 4.4 and 72.9 ± 4.1 years, and the mean final follow-up duration was 42 ± 21.8 and 37.7 ± 21.7 months in the ASCR and RSA groups, respectively. At the short-term follow-up, RSA achieved significant improvements in all clinical outcomes, except for internal rotation (IR), while ASCR only showed significant improvements in VAS pain, ASES, and SANE scores. Compared with the preoperative period, both ASCR and RSA achieved significant improvements in all clinical outcomes, except for IR in the RSA group at the final follow-up. The ASCR group achieved better IR and ASES scores at the final follow-up, while the time taken to recover from pseudoparalysis was shorter after RSA. The ASCR group showed a 67.8% graft healing rate at the 1-year follow-up, while the RSA group showed 12.1% of scapular notching at the final follow-up. No other postoperative complications were observed in either group. CONCLUSION: ASCR and RSA achieved favorable clinical outcomes in the study cohort. At the short-term follow-up, RSA showed significant improvements in all clinical outcomes, except for IR, while ASCR only showed significant improvements in VAS pain, ASES, and SANE scores. At the final follow-up, however, ASCR had better IR and ASES scores compared with RSA.