Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2022; 57(03): 472-479
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735943
Artigo Original

Reparo artroscópico da lesão de manguito rotador: Uma análise da função, força muscular e dor entre técnicas de fileira simples e fileira dupla

Article in several languages: português | English
Thiago Medeiros Storti 
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
2   Hospital Ortopédico e Medicina Especializada, Instituto de Pesquisa e Ensino, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
Thiago da Silva Ribeiro 
3   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
Rafael Salomon Silva Faria 
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
João Eduardo Simionatto 
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
Carolina Simionatto 
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
Alexandre Firmino Paniago 
1   Instituto do Ombro de Brasília, Brasília, DF, Brasil
2   Hospital Ortopédico e Medicina Especializada, Instituto de Pesquisa e Ensino, Brasília, DF, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Resumo

Objetivo Avaliar os pacientes submetidos ao reparo artroscópico do manguito rotador (MR), comparando-se os resultados funcionais, força muscular e dor obtidos após as técnicas de fileira simples (FS) e de fileira dupla (FD).

Métodos Foram coletados os dados do seguimento pós-operatório (mínimo de 12 meses) de 128 pacientes submetidos ao reparo artroscópico do MR durante o período de 2011 a 2018. As variáveis clínico-funcionais foram coletadas por meio do exame clínico, e as variáveis demográficas, cirúrgicas e das lesões do MR a partir dos prontuários eletrônicos. Os resultados foram comparados entre os grupos FS e FD.

Resultados O grupo FD demonstrou força de elevação anterior maior quando comparado ao grupo FS (FS: 4,72 ± 2,73 kg versus FD:5,90 ± 2,73 kg; p = 0,017). As demais variáveis de força muscular, Constant-Murley Score, University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale (UCLA, na sigla em inglês) e dor foram similares. Realizando-se a estratificação por tamanho, na análise das lesões pequenas e médias, não foram encontradas diferenças entre os grupos. Porém, na análise das lesões grandes e extensas, os pacientes submetidos à FD apresentaram superioridade tanto na força muscular de elevação (FS: 3,98 ± 2,24 kg versus FD: 6,39 ± 2,73 kg) quanto no escore Constant (FS: 81 ± 10 versus FD: 88 ± 7).

Conclusão A utilização da técnica de FD no reparo artroscópico do MR possibilitou maiores níveis de força muscular para elevação anterior do ombro quando comparada à técnica de FS. A estratificação dos dados em lesões grandes e extensas evidenciou superioridade da força muscular de elevação anterior do ombro e do escore Constant nos pacientes submetidos à FD.

Palavras-chave

manguito rotador - artroscopia - força muscular - avaliação funcional - ombro

Suporte Financeiro

Não houve suporte financeiro de fontes públicas, comerciais, ou sem fins lucrativos.


* Trabalho desenvolvido no Hospital Ortopédico e Medicina Especializada, Instituto de Pesquisa e Ensino, Brasília, DF, Brasil.




Publication History

Received: 29 July 2020

Accepted: 23 April 2021

Article published online:
21 January 2022

© 2022. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Sambandam SN, Khanna V, Gul A, Mounasamy V. Rotator cuff tears: An evidence based approach. World J Orthop 2015; 6 (11) 902-918
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Carvalho AL, Martinelli F, Tramujas L, Baggio M, Crocetta MS, Martins RO. Rotator cuff injuries and factors associated with reoperation. Rev Bras Ortop 2016; 51 (03) 298-302
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Dang A, Davies M. Rotator Cuff Disease: Treatment Options and Considerations. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 2018; 26 (03) 129-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Oliva F, Piccirilli E, Bossa M. et al. I.S.Mu.L.T - Rotator Cuff Tears Guidelines. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J 2016; 5 (04) 227-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Malavolta EA, Assunção JH, Beraldo RA, Pinto GMR, Gracitelli MEC, Ferreira NetoAA. Rotator cuff repair in the Brazilian Unified Health System: Brazilian trends from 2003 to 2015. Rev Bras Ortop 2017; 52 (04) 501-505
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Vieira FA, Olawa PJ, Belangero PS, Arliani GG, Figueiredo EA, Ejnisman B. Rotator cuff injuries: current perspectives and trends for treatment and rehabilitation. Rev Bras Ortop 2015; 50 (06) 647-651
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 DeHaan AM, Axelrad TW, Kaye E, Silvestri L, Puskas B, Foster TE. Does double-row rotator cuff repair improve functional outcome of patients compared with single-row technique? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40 (05) 1176-1185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chen M, Xu W, Dong Q, Huang Q, Xie Z, Mao Y. Outcomes of single-row versus double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence. Arthroscopy 2013; 29 (08) 1437-1449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ying ZM, Lin T, Yan SG. Arthroscopic single-row versus double-row technique for repairing rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop Surg 2014; 6 (04) 300-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Sobhy MH, Khater AH, Hassan MR, El Shazly O. Do functional outcomes and cuff integrity correlate after single- versus double-row rotator cuff repair? A systematic review and meta-analysis study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2018; 28 (04) 593-605
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Senna LF, Ramos MRF, Bergamaschi RF. Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row - clinical results after one to four years. Rev Bras Ortop 2018; 53 (04) 448-453
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Huang AL, Thavorn K, van Katwyk S, MacDonald P, Lapner P. Double-Row Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Is More Cost-Effective Than Single-Row Repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (20) 1730-1736
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lo IK, Burkhart SS. Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: re-establishing the footprint of the rotator cuff. Arthroscopy 2003; 19 (09) 1035-1042
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Davidson J, Burkhart SS. The geometric classification of rotator cuff tears: a system linking tear pattern to treatment and prognosis. Arthroscopy 2010; 26 (03) 417-424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Andrade RP, Correa Filho MRC, Queiroz BC. Lesões do manguito rotador. Rev Bras Ortop 2004; 39 (11/12): 621-635
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Amstutz HC, Sew Hoy AL, Clarke IC. UCLA anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1981; (155) 7-20
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987; (214) 160-164
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Scott J, Huskisson EC. Graphic representation of pain. Pain 1976; 2 (02) 175-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Barreto RP, Barbosa ML, Balbinotti MA, Mothes FC, da Rosa LH, Silva MF. The Brazilian version of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS-BR): convergent and construct validity, internal consistency, and unidimensionality. Rev Bras Ortop 2016; 51 (05) 515-520
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Oku EC, Andrade AP, Stadiniky SP, Carrera EF, Tellini GG. Tradução e adaptação cultural do Modified-University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale para a língua portuguesa. Rev Bras Reumatol 2006; 46 (04) 246-252
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Carbonel I, Martinez AA, Calvo A, Ripalda J, Herrera A. Single-row versus double-row arthroscopic repair in the treatment of rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomized clinical study. Int Orthop 2012; 36 (09) 1877-1883
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Godinho GG, França FdeO, Freitas JM. et al. Result from arthroscopic surgical treatment of renewed tearing of the rotator cuff of the shoulder. Rev Bras Ortop 2015; 50 (01) 89-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Miyazaki AN, da Silva LA, Santos PD, Checchia SL, Cohen C, Giora TS. Evaluation of the results from arthroscopic surgical treatment of rotator cuff injuries in patients aged 65 years and over. Rev Bras Ortop 2015; 50 (03) 305-311
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gilotra M, O'Brien MJ, Savoie 3rd. FH. Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Indication and Technique. Instr Course Lect 2016; 65: 83-92
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lazarides AL, Alentorn-Geli E, Choi JH. et al. Rotator cuff tears in young patients: a different disease than rotator cuff tears in elderly patients. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2015; 24 (11) 1834-1843
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 McElvany MD, McGoldrick E, Gee AO, Neradilek MB, Matsen 3rd. FA. Rotator cuff repair: published evidence on factors associated with repair integrity and clinical outcome. Am J Sports Med 2015; 43 (02) 491-500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Meier SW, Meier JD. The effect of double-row fixation on initial repair strength in rotator cuff repair: a biomechanical study. Arthroscopy 2006; 22 (11) 1168-1173
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Smith CD, Alexander S, Hill AM. et al. A biomechanical comparison of single and double-row fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (11) 2425-2431
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Tudisco C, Bisicchia S, Savarese E. et al. Single-row vs. double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: clinical and 3 Tesla MR arthrography results. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2013; 14: 43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Shen C, Tang ZH, Hu JZ, Zou GY, Xiao RC. Incidence of retear with double-row versus single-row rotator cuff repair. Orthopedics 2014; 37 (11) e1006-e1013
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Ma HL, Chiang ER, Wu HT. et al. Clinical outcome and imaging of arthroscopic single-row and double-row rotator cuff repair: a prospective randomized trial. Arthroscopy 2012; 28 (01) 16-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Nho SJ, Brown BS, Lyman S, Adler RS, Altchek DW, MacGillivray JD. Prospective analysis of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: prognostic factors affecting clinical and ultrasound outcome. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009; 18 (01) 13-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Bedeir YH, Jimenez AE, Grawe BM. Recurrent tears of the rotator cuff: Effect of repair technique and management options. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 2018; 10 (02) 7593
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Schmidt CC, Jarrett CD, Brown BT. Management of rotator cuff tears. J Hand Surg Am 2015; 40 (02) 399-408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar