Reimbursement, efficiency, and safety in rotator cuff repair: a comparative study of arthroscopic and open approaches

Background: Rotator cuff repair (RCR) is one of the most common orthopedic procedures in the United States. Although arthroscopic and open RCR yield similar long-term outcomes, differences in reimbursement and short-term safety are less understood. This study aimed to evaluate differences between RCR techniques in work relative value units (wRVUs), operative times, Medicare reimbursement amounts, and 30-day complication rates. Methods: To data collection, the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was retrospectively analyzed (2006-2023). Patients undergoing arthroscopic or open RCR were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes and matched 1:1 via propensity score matching according to demographics and comorbidities. Outcomes included operative time, wRVUs, Medicare reimbursement amount, and 30-day postoperative complications. Results: A total of 18,988 matched patients (9,494 with arthroscopic RCR, 9,494 with open RCR) were included. Arthroscopic RCR cases had significantly longer operative times than open RCR cases (91.82±43.71 minutes vs. 80.93±41.02 minutes, P<0.001) but generated 17.7% higher wRVUs per minute (0.20±0.09 vs. 0.17±0.07, P<0.001) and 36.0% more revenue per case ($485.20±$0.00 vs. $356.77±$7.54, P<0.001). Arthroscopic RCR patients had significantly lower overall 30-day complication rates (1.1% vs. 1.5%, P=0.010), including fewer superficial (0.2% vs. 0.4%, P=0.023) and deep surgical site infections (0.0% vs. 0.2%, P=0.004). Conclusions: Arthroscopic RCR is associated with lower short-term complication rates than open RCR, despite requiring longer operative times and more resources. This clinical trade-off suggests that the additional operative demands of arthroscopic surgery are justified by the associated improvements in patient safety, highlighting the value of reduced complications as a key advantage of the arthroscopic approach. Level of evidence: III.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
Published
2026-04-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5397/cise.2025.01277
Primary Topic
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reimbursement, efficiency, and safety in rotator cuff repair: a comparative study of arthroscopic and open approaches

Alexander R. Zhu, Eric Mao, Grace Q Chen, Uma Srikumaran et al.
Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
article

Reimbursement, efficiency, and safety in rotator cuff repair: a comparative study of arthroscopic and open approaches

Alexander R. Zhu, Eric Mao, Grace Q Chen, Uma Srikumaran, Ashley R. Zhu
article en

Abstract

Background: Rotator cuff repair (RCR) is one of the most common orthopedic procedures in the United States. Although arthroscopic and open RCR yield similar long-term outcomes, differences in reimbursement and short-term safety are less understood. This study aimed to evaluate differences between RCR techniques in work relative value units (wRVUs), operative times, Medicare reimbursement amounts, and 30-day complication rates. Methods: To data collection, the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was retrospectively analyzed (2006-2023). Patients undergoing arthroscopic or open RCR were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes and matched 1:1 via propensity score matching according to demographics and comorbidities. Outcomes included operative time, wRVUs, Medicare reimbursement amount, and 30-day postoperative complications. Results: A total of 18,988 matched patients (9,494 with arthroscopic RCR, 9,494 with open RCR) were included. Arthroscopic RCR cases had significantly longer operative times than open RCR cases (91.82±43.71 minutes vs. 80.93±41.02 minutes, P<0.001) but generated 17.7% higher wRVUs per minute (0.20±0.09 vs. 0.17±0.07, P<0.001) and 36.0% more revenue per case ($485.20±$0.00 vs. $356.77±$7.54, P<0.001). Arthroscopic RCR patients had significantly lower overall 30-day complication rates (1.1% vs. 1.5%, P=0.010), including fewer superficial (0.2% vs. 0.4%, P=0.023) and deep surgical site infections (0.0% vs. 0.2%, P=0.004). Conclusions: Arthroscopic RCR is associated with lower short-term complication rates than open RCR, despite requiring longer operative times and more resources. This clinical trade-off suggests that the additional operative demands of arthroscopic surgery are justified by the associated improvements in patient safety, highlighting the value of reduced complications as a key advantage of the arthroscopic approach. Level of evidence: III.

Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
Northwestern University (US), Johns Hopkins University (US), Johns Hopkins Medicine (US)
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.