SpringerLink
Log in

Review of 41 Neer’s mini-open operations with up to nine-year follow-up and a study of the influence of occupational disease

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The shoulder pain has been reported as the third most common site after low back pain and knee pain, mostly caused by im**ement and rotator cuff syndromes. Surgery is indicated when non-operative treatment fails and can be open and/or arthroscopic. Are Neer’s acromioplasty results still good? Are they modified when it is a professional disease (PD)? If yes is there any explanation?

Materials and methods

It is a retrospective hospital-based study, including all cases of Neer’s acromioplasty done from 2006 to 2011, by the same senior surgeon for subacromial im**ement syndrome (SIS). Medical files were consulted and an auto Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score file completed by patients. We compared two groups: “with PD” and “without PD”.

Results

We had 41 patients (21 males/20 females). Mean age: 54 (34–79) years. The majority was workers those requiring force (29.3 %) or working in abduction situations (7.2 %). The two groups were otherwise comparable (clinical, imaging and surgery findings). Aggressive acromia were found in 15 cases (36.6 %), and there were 19 (46.3 %) rotator cuff perforations. A Neer’s acromioplasty and bursectomy was done in all the cases. Eighteen perforations were sutured and one (the largest) was just released. Mean follow-up: 4 (2–9) years. Of the 26 (63.4 %) patients that could return to work, 16 (61.5 %) were not PD. This return was later in the “PD group” (p < 0.05). The DASH score elements in the “without PD” group were better, compared to the PD group: (a) 16 (79.2 %) very good results on the pain against 6 (30 %), (b) 13 (61.9 %) very good results concerning the strength against 3 (15 %), (c) 14 (66.7 %) very good results in the ability to work against 4 (20 %). The DASH global mean score was 35.1 over 100. The global scores for daily life, sport and professional activities were, respectively, 33, 37.8 and 48.2 over 100. In the PD group, the mean DASH score was 53.7 against 17.44 in the non-PD what is more than three times worst.

Discussion

Neer’s mini-open acromioplasty is still an excellent pain killer operation and should not be abandoned. Very good results on the SIS pain after a mean follow-up of 4 years were observed. Its results are very good in the “without PD” group with 76.19 % of return to previous work after a mean period of 8 months. Earlier return to a new work or to the same work with accommodations is possible. We found no anatomical explanation for the differences between the two groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

Coraco-acr. ligt:

Coraco-acromial ligament

CSA:

Conflit sous-acromial

DASH:

Disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand

MP:

Maladie professionnelle

PD:

Professional disease

SIS:

Subacromial im**ement syndrome

References

  1. Urwin M, Symmons D, Allison T et al (1998) Estimating the burden of musculoskeletal disorders in the community: the comparative prevalence of symptoms at different anatomical sites, and the relation to social deprivation. Ann Rheum Dis 5711:649–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Tekavec and al (2012) Population-based consultation patterns in patients with shoulder pain diagnoses. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 13:238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Somerville LE (2014) No single test accurately diagnoses rotator cuff disease. Am J Sports Med. doi:10.1177/0363546514538390

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nordqvist A, Rahme H, Hovelius L, Etzner M (2007) Shoulder diseases. Lakartidning 104(19):1492–1496

    Google Scholar 

  5. Internet site of the french technical agency for information on hospitalisation. http://www.atih.sante.fr

  6. Duquin TR, Buyea C, Bisson LJ (2010) Which method of rotator cuff repair leads to the highest rate of structural healing? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med 38(4):835–841

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Misamore GW, Ziegler DW, Rushton JL (1995) Repair of the rotator cuff. A comparison of results in two populations of patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77-A(5):1335–1339

    Google Scholar 

  8. Flurin PH, Landreau P, Gregory T, Boileau P, Brassart N, Courage O et al (2005) Arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears: retrospective and multicentric study of 576 cases with healing contrôl. Rev Chir Orthop 91(8 Suppl):4S32–4S42

    Google Scholar 

  9. Zandi H, Coghlan JA, Bell SN (2006) Mini-incision rotator cuff repair: a longitudinal assessment with no deterioration of result up to nine years. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 15(2):15–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. David F, Barry D (2014) Clinical commentary current concept in rotator cuff tendinopathy. Int J Sports Phys Ther 9(2):274

    Google Scholar 

  11. LL Shi, TB Edwards (2012) The role of acromioplasty for management of rotator cuff problems: where is the evidence? Hindawi Publishing Corporation. Adv Orthop, vol 2012, Article ID 467571, p 5. doi:10.1155/467571

  12. Kinnard P, Van Hoef K, Major D, Lirette R (1996) Comparison between open and arthroscopic acromioplasties: evaluation of absenteeism. Can J Surg 39(1):21–23

    PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bollier M, Shea K (2012) Systematic review: what surgical technique provides the best outcome for symptomatic partial articular-sided rotator cuff tears? Iowa Orthop J 32:164–172

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Weber SC (1997) Arthroscopic debridement and acromioplasty versus mini-open repair in the management of significant partial-thickness tears of the rotator cuff. Orthop Clin North Am 28:79–82

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pearsall AW, Ibrahim AK, Madanagopal SG (2007) The results of arthroscopic versus mini-open repair for rotator cuff tears at mid-term follow-up. J Orthop Surg Res 2:24. doi:10.1186/1749-799X-2-24

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Khan Y, Nagy MT, Malal J, Waseem M (2013) The painful shoulder: shoulder im**ement syndrome. Open Orthop J 7(Suppl 3 : M9):347–351

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Service d’orthopédie et de traumatologie, Hôpitaux Civils de Colmar, 68024, Colmar Cedex, France

    C. Schwartz, F. Atemkeng & T. Messaoudi

Authors
  1. C. Schwartz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Atemkeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Messaoudi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Schwartz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schwartz, C., Atemkeng, F. & Messaoudi, T. Review of 41 Neer’s mini-open operations with up to nine-year follow-up and a study of the influence of occupational disease. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25, 717–721 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-014-1580-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-014-1580-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation