Platelet‐Rich Plasma in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Clinical and Radiological Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Study at 10‐Year Follow‐Up

Purpose: The aim of the study is to compare, at 10-year follow-up, the clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with or without the addition of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) over the tendon-bone interface at the end of the surgical procedure. Methods: Of 53 patients recruited in the study, and randomly divided into 2 groups (PRP = 26; control = 27), 38 were re-evaluated at least 10 years after the index procedure. The clinical evaluation was carried out through: University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder Score, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Simple Shoulder Test, Constant-Murley Score (CMS), Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and isometric strength in abduction, forward flexion and external rotation. Musculoskeletal ultrasonography had been used to evaluate the integrity of the repaired cuff. Results: A number of 38 (71%) patients (PRP = 17; control = 21) with a median age of 71 [64.75-76.50] years have been evaluated. Satisfaction at follow-up is high (90%), without statistically significant difference between the two groups. We report good and excellent clinical results in both groups (PRP vs control): CMS (81.62 [72.47-85.75] vs 77.97 [69.52-82.55] points), UCLA (34 [29.00-35.00] vs 33 [29.00-35.00] points), VAS (0.34 [0.00-1.85] vs 0.70 [0.00-2.45] cm). It was not possible to find a statistically significant difference for the variables analyzed, except for ASES and SANE. On average, 37% of the operated patients had a re-rupture at the ultrasound examination, regardless of the treatment group (P = 1.00). Compared with the previous radiological control at the 2-year follow-up, new retears occurred in 6% of the patients who received PRP treatment, whereas in the control group the percentage raises to 14% (P = .61). Conclusion: The clinical and radiological outcomes at the 10-year follow-up show a substantial uniformity of results between the 2 groups. The minor differences that had been observed at 2-year follow-up disappeared at long term. Patients’ satisfaction is still high 10 years after surgical treatment. Level of Evidence: Level II, randomized controlled trial, treatment study.