Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Treatment of High‐Grade Partial Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears With Augmentation Using Bioinductive Collagen Implants Are Comparable With Tear Completion and Repair

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the functional outcomes and reoperation rates after bioinductive collagen implant repair (BCIR) versus arthroscopic tear completion and rotator cuff repair (ARCR) for the management of partial rotator cuff tears at a minimum of 1 years follow-up. METHODS: A retrospective review was carried out to identify patients ≥30 years old who underwent BCIR or ARCR for grade 3 partial-thickness supraspinatus tears with ≥12 months of follow-up. Clinical outcomes assessed included range of motion, visual analog score (VAS), American Shoulder Elbow Score (ASES) and Single Answer Numerical Evaluation (SANE) scores, as well as clinical failure requiring revision surgery. A P value of < .05 was considered to be statistically significant. The minimally important clinical difference (MCID) was calculated. RESULTS: Participants included 48 patients who underwent BCIR and 37 who underwent ARCR, with a mean follow-up 27.3 ± 11.8 months. There were no significant baseline differences in demographics or tear characteristics between the cohorts. The mean surgical duration was shorter in the BCIR cohort (53 ± 10 vs 65 ± 17 minutes, P = .001). At final follow up there was no difference in ASES (P = .143), SANE (P = .167), VAS scores (P = .130), range of flexion (P = .159), abduction (P = .379) or external rotation (P = .281). Both groups obtained significant postoperative improvements (P < .02, for all). There was no difference in the achievement of the MCID for VAS (P = .999), SANE (P = .435) or ASES score (0.377). There was no significant difference in the rate of revision repair at final follow up 2.1% vs 5.4% (P = .577). CONCLUSIONS: BCIR of high grade partial-thickness rotator cuff tears results in reliable improvements in pain, shoulder function and range of motion equivalent to traditional suture anchor repair. There was no difference in the rate of MCID achievement or revision surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative series.