ABSTRACT
Background: Massive rotator cuff tears (MRCT) account for a substantial fraction of tears above the age of 60 years. However, there are no clear criteria for prescription parameters within therapeutic exercise treatments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects and characteristics of therapeutic exercise treatments in patients with MRCT. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, SciELO, Scopus and EMBASE from inception to August 2022. Studies were included if they evaluated the effects of exercise on patients with MRCT. The risk of bias was evaluated and the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) was also used. A narrative synthesis without meta-analysis was performed. Results: One randomized controlled trial, two non-randomized studies, six non-controlled studies, one case series and four retrospective studies were included. They ranged from serious to moderate risk of bias. The CERT reflected a poor description of the exercise programmes. Studies showed a pattern of improvements in most patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) surpassing the MCID, and active elevation range of motion. Conclusions: There is limited evidence that exercise and co-interventions are effective in the management of some patients with MRCT, based on a systematic review without meta-analysis. Future research should improve content reporting. Level of evidence: IV.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: There are no meta-analytical data in the long term for comparing surgery and exercise for meniscal tear. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of exercise versus arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) plus exercise for degenerative meniscal tears (DMT) in knee function at 5-year follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, SciELO, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and Cochrane Library was performed. The studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials performed in patients aged ≥ 18 years with DMT, that compared physical therapy to APM at 5-year follow-up, and reported at least one outcome measure of knee function/disability. Risk of bias was analyzed with the Cochrane RoB-2 tool and certainty of evidence with GRADE recommendations. A random effects model meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: 3743 articles were identified and 4 met the criteria. Three had low risk of bias and one had some concerns. There were no significant between-group differences, in within-group changes from baseline to 5-year, on the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score pain (- 2.28; 95% CI - 5.41 to 0.84), symptoms (- 0.24; 95% CI - 4.13 to 3.64), activities of daily living (- 2.16; 95% CI - 6.16 to 1.83) and quality of life (- 3.98; 95% CI - 9.05 to 1.10). There was a significant difference in support of APM plus exercise for sport/recreation (- 9.28; 95% CI - 18.28 to - 0.29). Leave-one-out sensitivity analysis revealed a non-significant difference in sport/recreation (- 5.05; 95% CI - 12.04 to 1.94). There were no differences in other patient-reported outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Moderate certainty of evidence suggests that the addition of APM to an exercise program adds no benefits in knee function at 5-year follow-up.
