Comparison of arthroscopic and open revision decompression for failed anterior acromioplasty

Patrick M. Connor, Ken Yamaguchi, Roger G. Pollock, Evan L. Flatow, Louis U. Bigliani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Scopus citations

Abstract

Thirty-six consecutive patients who underwent revision decompression for refractory subacromial impingement were studied retrospectively. Average interval from the primary decompression procedure to revision was 29 months. Eighteen patients underwent arthroscopic and 18 underwent open revision. Six (33%) patients in the arthroscopic group and 12 (67%) patients in the open group were workers' compensation cases. At an average follow-up of 26 months, 17 (94%) patients in the arthroscopic group and 8 (44%) in the open group were satisfied with their-procedure. Comparing workers' compensation patients, 5 of 6 in the arthroscopic group and 4 of 12 in the open group were satisfied. For nonworkers' compensation patients, all 12 patients in the arthroscopic group and 4 of 6 in the open group were satisfied. Average pain scores and postoperative range of motion was improved in both groups. Dense subacromial scarring with thick, fibrous adhesions was present in all patients. Residual, prominent bone, or an acromial spur was found in 20 (56%) patients. Overall, revision arthroscopic subacromial decompression was superior to open revision. However, there were more workers' compensation patients in the open group. Workers' compensation patients fared worse for both groups, but a significant proportion (83%) of the arthroscopic group was satisfied. Since subacromial scarring may be the most important pathology, arthroscopy is less invasive, allowing earlier, unrestricted postoperative rehabilitation and proving more effective.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)549-554
Number of pages6
JournalOrthopedics
Volume23
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jul 6 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of arthroscopic and open revision decompression for failed anterior acromioplasty'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Connor, P. M., Yamaguchi, K., Pollock, R. G., Flatow, E. L., & Bigliani, L. U. (2000). Comparison of arthroscopic and open revision decompression for failed anterior acromioplasty. Orthopedics, 23(6), 549-554.