Outcome Following Surgery to Repair Rotator Cuff Tears

June 27, 2025 updated by: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

Functional and Anatomical Results Following Arthroscopic Cuff Repair

There are two ways in which surgeons repair rotator cuff tears. An open method involves making an incision (cut) 5-6 inches in length in the skin and repairing the tear with the skin open, while the arthroscopic method involves making small holes in the skin and using a guiding camera and special equipment to repair the tear. This clinical study is being conducted to study the rate of re-tear (one year following surgery) of rotator cuffs that have been repaired using the arthroscopic technique.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Terminated

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

While many studies have researched re-tear rate for rotator cuff tears following open repair, to date there have been no studies evaluating re-tear rate following arthroscopic surgery. Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair is less invasive and exposes the patient to fewer risks than open surgery. Once this pilot study is completed the next step will be to compare the rate of re-tear, as assessed via Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) between the two techniques. If the rate of re-tear is lower following arthroscopic surgery this will provide validation for use of the arthroscopic technique. If, however, the rate of re-tear is higher using the arthroscopic technique, then use of this technique is not justified.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
67

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Canada
    • Ontario
      • Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Y4E9
        • Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients will be screened by participating surgeons in a fellowship-run outpatient shoulder clinic. Patients who have consented and are scheduled to undergo an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and who have a cuff tear size of <5 cm, and involving 2 or fewer tendons, and meet the additional eligibility criteria will be approached to join the study.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 1. Diagnosis of rotator cuff tear which will involve one of the following:1) history of shoulder pain or weakness 2) ability to illicit pain or weakness with one of the following signs: tenderness of the rotator cuff insertion, palpable crepitus of the subacromial bursa or a palpable defect of the cuff insertion, impingement signs and weakness of the rotator cuff musculature 3) radiological evidence of rotator cuff tear from ultrasound, arthrogram or MRI. Failed non-operative treatment. Size of tear of less than 5 cm and involving 2 or fewer tendons

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Clinical:1. Tear as defined by significant muscular wasting, inability to actively forward-flex (strength grade 2/5 or worse), positive drop sign or hornblowers 2. Significant tenderness of acromioclavicular or sternoclavicular joints on affected side3. Presence of comorbid shoulder instability or evidence of SLAP lesion4. Previous surgery on affected shoulderRadiological:1. Bony abnormality on standardized series of x-rays consisting of a minimum of an antero-posterior view, lateral “Y” view in the scapular plane, and an axillary view.2. Presence of massive cuff tear on MRI or ultrasound (defined as > 5 cm or greater than 2 tendons torn).Arthroscopic:1. Presence of massive cuff tear as defined above on arthroscopic examination of the joint 2. Presence of comorbid conditions: Bankart lesion, SLAP lesion3. Inability to complete the repair arthroscopically (eg. partial repair by marginal convergence without direct repair to bone)Other:Patients who have any contraindication to MRI (including claustrophobia, intracranial aneurism clip, cardiac pacemaker, middle ear prosthesis, metallic heart valve prosthesis, prior metal fragment in eye (intraocular lens implant) etc.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Observational Models: Cohort
  • Time Perspectives: Prospective

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Rate of re-tear at 1 year
Time Frame: 1 year
The rate of rotator cuff re-tear will be measured 1-year post-operatively using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Arthrogram.
1 year

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Functional Status Anatomical integrity
Time Frame: 1 year
Overall functional status will be assessed by the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), which is a shoulder specific assessment divided into two sections: pain and activities of daily living (ADL). The overall score is an equal weight of the two sections and produces a score out of 100. The higher the score, the better the outcome. Functional status will also be assessed using The Constant Score reflects an overall clinical functional assessment. This instrument is based on a 100-point scoring system. Subjective findings (pain, activities of daily living, and working in different positions) make up a total of 35 points. Objective measurements make up the remaining 65 points. The test is divided into four sub-categories: (1) pain (2) activities of daily living ability; (3) mobility; (4) strength. All categories are added together, and a total score out of 100 is given (higher score indicates better outcome).
1 year

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Peter Lapner, OHRI

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
November 1, 2004

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
August 1, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
September 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
November 30, 2005

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
November 30, 2005

First Posted (Estimated)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
December 2, 2005

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
July 2, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
June 27, 2025

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
June 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 2003534-01H

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings