To compare the clinical results of an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with those of a mini-open repair.

Sixty-three patients with a rotator cuff tear were enrolled in this study. Thirty patients had an arthroscopic repair and 33 patients underwent a mini-open repair. The average age was 50 years (range, 23-74) in the arthroscopic group and 50 years (range, 38-69) in the mini-open group. In the arthroscopic group, 8 patients had small-sized tears (<1 cm), 18 patients had medium tears (1-3 cm), and 4 patients had large tears (3-5 cm). In the mini-open group, 12 patients had small tears, 19 patients had medium tears, and 2 patients had large tears. The average follow-up period in the arthroscopic and mini-open groups was 39 (range, 24-77) and 40 months (range, 24-64), respectively.

The level of shoulder pain [1.10 vs. 1.45, p>0.05], the range of motion, muscle strength, patient's satisfaction, the ASES score [91.7 vs. 88.6, p>0.05] and the UCLA score [32.4 vs. 31.2, p>0.05] were compared. The size of the tear did not produce different results. In the arthroscopic group, the tendon tore again in one patient, and one anchor-related complication was noted. In the mini-open group, one patient developed a stiff shoulder.

An arthroscopic and a mini-open repair of rotator cuff tears produced similar clinical results and the size of the tear had little effect. The clinical results depend on the surgical technique and the patient's condition, rather than the method of repair.