How are you taking part in this consultation?

You will not be able to change how you comment later.

You must be signed in to answer questions

    The content on this page is not current guidance and is only for the purposes of the consultation process.

    3 Committee considerations

    The evidence

    3.1 NICE did a rapid review of the published literature on the efficacy and safety of this procedure. This comprised a comprehensive literature search and detailed review of the evidence from 9 sources, which was discussed by the committee. The evidence included 2 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 2 systematic reviews, 1 case-control study, 1 retrospective comparative study and 3 case series. It is presented in the summary of key evidence section in the interventional procedures overview. Other relevant literature is in the appendix of the overview.

    3.2 The professional experts and the committee considered the key efficacy outcomes to be: improvement in shoulder function, reduction in pain and patient-reported outcomes.

    3.3 The professional experts and the committee considered the key safety outcomes to be: pain, bleeding, infection and reduction in range of shoulder motion.

    3.4 Patient commentary was sought but none was received.

    Committee comments

    3.5 The committee noted that there was strong evidence from a UK-based, group-sequential, double-blind multicentre RCT. It found that biodegradable subacromial spacer insertion was inferior to debridement alone and did not improve the primary outcome of Oxford Shoulder Score at 12 months. The study was stopped early because of futility. The result of this study was the main factor in the committee's decision to recommend that the procedure should not be used when debridement is a suitable option. The committee also understood that there is some uncertainty among experts about the benefit of debridement compared with non-surgical care.

    3.6 The committee noted that another RCT had conflicting findings and showed non-inferiority of the procedure compared with partial rotator cuff repair. Patient selection may have contributed to these conflicting results, so more research is needed in other populations, and the committee made recommendation 1.4 on the importance of patient selection.

    3.7 The committee was informed that biodegradable subacromial spacer insertion for rotator cuff tears may have a role in people with a rotator cuff tear who also have inflammatory arthritis. This may be because mobilisation and reintroduction of biological medicines can happen sooner after surgery than with other procedures.

    Tom Clutton-Brock
    Chair, interventional procedures advisory committee
    May 2023

    ISBN: