Summary of Meta Analyses Dealing with Single Row versus Double Row Repair Techniques for Rotator Cuff Tears
Background: Several meta analyses of randomized clinical trials have been performed to analyze whether double row (DR) rotator cuff repair (RCR) provides superior clinical outcomes and structural healing compared to single row (SR) repair. The purpose of this study was to sum up the results of meta analysis comparing SR and DR repair with respect on clinical outcomes and re tear rates. Methods: A literature search was undertaken to identify all meta analyses dealing with randomized controlled trials comparing clinical und structural outcomes after SR versus DR RCR. Results: Eight meta analyses met the eligibility criteria: two including Level I studies only, five including both Level I and Level II studies, and one including additional Level III studies. Four meta analyses found no differences between SR and DR RCR for patient outcomes, whereas four favored DR RCR for tears greater than 3 cm. Two meta analyses found no structural healing differences between SR and DR RCR, whereas six found DR repair to be superior for tears greater than 3 cm tears. Conclusion: No clinical differences are seen between single row and double row repair for small and medium rotator cuff tears after a short term follow up period with a higher re tear rate following single row repairs. There seems to be a trend to superior results with double row repair in large to massive tear sizes.
The open orthopaedics journal