Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several researchers have investigated the clinical outcomes in patients with rotator cuff tear who compared open and arthroscopic surgeries; however, there are limited studies that have compared the outcomes of arthroscopic and open rotator cuff repair. This study was aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of the patients who underwent rotator cuff repair using either arthroscopic or open repair techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study in which 51 patients who underwent either open or arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were studied. Twenty-six patients underwent open repair, and 25 patients had an arthroscopic repair. Patients were followed for 6-36 months. The outcome of the two groups was evaluated using the Universal California Los Angles (UCLA) score. RESULTS: The mean tear size was 4.93 ± 2.3 cm(2) in the open surgery group and 4.99 ± 2.3 cm(2) in the arthroscopic group (P = 0.93). All patients showed significant improvement in their scores for pain, active forward flexion, active abduction, and function at the time of follow-up. Improvement in scores within each group was significant, but the comparison of the two techniques was not statistically significant in pain, active abduction, active forward flexion, and UCLA, but in function, the open surgery group was superior (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study revealed that short-term outcomes for arthroscopic and open cuff repair are similar, except in function, which was significantly better in the open surgery.