A Comparison of Conventional Ultrasonography and Arthrosonography in the Assessment of Cuff Integrity after Rotator Cuff Repair

BACKGROUND This study was designed to perform conventional ultrasonography, magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) and arthrosonography exams after rotator cuff repair to compare the results of conventional ultrasonography and arthrosonography with those of MRA as the gold standard. METHODS We prospectively studied 42 consecutive patients (14 males, 28 females; average age, 59.4 years) who received arthroscopic rotator cuff repair due to full-thickness tears of the supraspinatus tendon from 2008 to 2010. The integrity assessment of the repaired rotator cuff was performed 6 months postoperatively using conventional ultrasonography, MRA, and arthrosonography. RESULTS The diagnostic accuracy of the conventional ultrasonography compared to MRA was 78.6% and the McNemar test results were 0.016 in full-thickness tear and 0.077 in partial-thickness tear. The diagnostic accuracy of arthrosonography compared to MRA was 92.9% and the McNemar test results were 0.998 in full-thickness tear and 0.875 in partial-thickness tear. CONCLUSIONS It was found that the integrity assessment of the repaired rotator cuff by ultrasonography must be guarded against and that arthrosonography is an effective alternative method in the postoperative integrity assessment. Also, an arthrosonography seems to be a suitable modality to replace the conventional ultrasonography.