Open repairs with biceps rerouting does not impact retears in large to massive rotator cuff tears compared to conventional open repair: a randomized clinical trial.
J Shoulder Elbow SurgMay 2, 2026 (epub)
Clinical ResearchOrthopedic Surgery
Gustavo de Mello Ribeiro Pinto, Rodrigo Chauke Rezende, Eduardo Brown et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This randomized clinical trial compared outcomes of open repair for large to massive rotator cuff tears with biceps rerouting versus conventional repair in 58 patients. The study found no significant differences in functional scores or healing rates between the two techniques, with rotator cuff healing rates of 48.3% for biceps rerouting and 44.8% for conventional repair (P = .402).
Key findings
- No significant difference in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon scores: 76.1 vs. 80.4 (P = .761).
- Rotator cuff healing rates were similar: 48.3% for biceps rerouting vs. 44.8% for conventional repair (P = .402).
- Both groups showed significant clinical improvement over time (P < 0.01).
Why it matters
Understanding the effectiveness of different surgical techniques for rotator cuff repairs is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes. This study suggests that biceps rerouting may not provide additional benefits over conventional repair.