Clinicians › Shoulder

Subacromial Decompression

Arthroscopic subacromial decompression for impingement and bursitis — operation and recovery.

85 citationsUpdated Oct 2026

For patients: a plain-language version of this topic is available. See the patient guide.

Overview

Subacromial decompression is an arthroscopic procedure intended to relieve symptoms of subacromial pain syndrome and impingement, though its efficacy remains a subject of significant clinical debate. Current evidence presents a dichotomy: while isolated arthroscopic subacromial decompression is effective in 70% to 75% of cases [4] and provides significant improvements in pain, function, and quality of life in a cost-effective manner [16], it did not provide any clinical or structurally substantial benefit for the treatment of subacromial pain syndrome or the surgical repair of rotator cuff tears [1]. Consequently, the guideline panel makes a strong recommendation against subacromial decompression surgery for adults with subacromial pain syndrome [7], noting that the procedure offers no discernible benefits over nonoperative management or no treatment, yet may result in harm [41].

Indications for the procedure are strictly reserved for patients with evidence of mechanical impingement and pain that has not responded to nonsurgical measures [10]. Nonoperative treatment remains the appropriate initial therapy, with operative management considered only when conservative measures fail [14]. When proper indications are met, outcomes are excellent [2], and the procedure is considered a valid treatment for patients selected according to Danish national guidelines [19]. However, there is no current strong evidence to definitively support either subacromial decompression or nonoperative treatment, requiring surgeons to rely on clinical judgment and careful patient selection [6]. The treatment of subacromial impingement syndrome remains controversial, with conservative management as the initial mainstay and surgery reserved for failures [8].

Regarding specific surgical contexts, formal subacromial decompression does not result in improved clinical outcomes up to 2 years after rotator cuff repair [13], and long-term clinical outcomes are significantly higher in patients treated only with rotator cuff repair compared to those undergoing repair with subacromial decompression [11]. At short-term follow-up, the procedure did not seem to significantly affect the outcome of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair [27]. Furthermore, arthroscopic subacromial decompression provided no benefit over diagnostic arthroscopy or exercise therapy on return to work [18], and both arthroscopic subacromial decompression and diagnostic arthroscopy resulted in significant improvements in pain and functional outcomes with no difference in the incidence of adverse events [3]. Given the lack of measurable benefit and significantly higher costs, laser assistance in arthroscopic subacromial decompression procedures cannot be recommended [50].

Anatomy & Pathophysiology

Bony Anatomy

The acromion is an extension of the scapular spine that has enlarged over evolutionary time to reflect the increasing role of the deltoid muscle in shoulder function [72]. It possesses three ossification centers: the metacromion at the base, the mesoacromion in the middle, and the preacromion at the tip [65]. Failure of these centers to fuse results in os acromiale [65]. The acromion process is located posterosuperiorly, while the coracoid process is located anteriorly; they are joined by the coracoacromial ligament to form a fibro-osseous canopy over the rotator cuff [70]. This structure, along with the acromion and coracoid process, forms the rigid bony-ligamentous coracoacromial arch [62]. The rotator cuff, subacromial bursa, and subdeltoid bursa pass underneath this arch [62].

The glenoid is a convex structure of shallow depth shaped like an inverted pear [62]. The humeral head is spherical with a diameter of 37 to 57 mm [62]. The most superior portion of the humeral head’s articular surface averages 8 mm above the greater tuberosity [62]. Humeral version averages 29.8 degrees, with a range of 10 to 55 degrees [62]. The humeral head is inclined approximately 130 degrees with respect to the humeral shaft [62]. The greater tuberosity serves as the attachment site for the supraspinatus, infraspinatus, and teres minor tendons [62], while the lesser tuberosity serves as the attachment site for the subscapularis tendon [62].

The classification of acromial morphology into flat, curved, or hooked types is challenged by poor interobserver reliability [65]. Consequently, the acromial morphology classification system is considered an unreliable method to assess the acromion [49]. The acromial index shows no association with the presence of rotator cuff disease [49], and the relationship between acromial anatomy and rotator cuff disease remains controversial [65].

Soft Tissue Anatomy

The rotator cuff consists of the subscapularis, supraspinatus, infraspinatus, and teres minor muscles [63]. These muscles serve as depressors of the humeral head to allow the deltoid to efficiently abduct the humerus [63]. Functionally, the infraspinatus and teres minor are external rotators, while the subscapularis is an internal rotator of the humerus [63]. The subacromial bursa separates the rotator cuff tendons from the coracoacromial arch and allows them to glide [70]. It is one of two bursae in the shoulder region with particular clinical importance [66]. The subscapular bursa lies between the subscapularis tendon and the neck of the scapula and communicates with the joint cavity between the superior and middle glenohumeral ligaments [66].

The humeroscapular motion interface is lined mostly by the subacromial and subdeltoid bursa [68]. This interface lies between the inner structures of the proximal humerus, rotator cuff, coracohumeral ligament, and biceps tendon sheath, and the superficial layer of the acromion, deltoid, coracoacromial ligament, coracoid process, and conjoined tendon [68]. Smooth, unrestricted motion at this interface is vital to shoulder mobility [68]. Adhesions in the humeroscapular motion interface can limit shoulder mobility, as seen in scarring after proximal humerus fracture trauma and after acromioplasty and rotator cuff tear repair [68].

The axillary nerve has an intimate relationship within the humeroscapular motion interface [68]. It is a terminal branch coming off the posterior cord of the brachial plexus just proximal to the coracoid process [68]. The nerve passes beneath the conjoined tendon anterior to the subscapularis 3 to 5 mm medial to the musculotendinous junction [68]. It then courses adjacent to the inferior capsule before entering the quadrilateral space posteriorly [68]. The anterior and middle deltoid muscle receives sole innervation from the anterior branch of the axillary nerve [68]. Posterior deltoid muscle innervation varies, with supply only from the anterior branch in 2.3% of cases, from the posterior branch in 8.5%, and from both branches in 89.1% [68]. The posterior branch of the axillary nerve branches to supply the teres minor muscle and then terminates as the superior lateral brachial cutaneous nerve [68].

The coracoacromial ligament contributes to anterosuperior stability in rotator cuff deficiency [76]. The acromial branch of the thoracoacromial artery runs on the medial aspect of the coracoacromial ligament [76].

Pathophysiology

There are two competing theories regarding rotator cuff pathology: intrinsic and extrinsic [45]. The extrinsic theory posits that acromial morphology is the initiating factor leading to dysfunction of the rotator cuff and eventual tearing [45]. The mechanistic theory of subacromial decompression contends that impingement symptoms occur primarily due to repetitive compressive and shearing forces on the rotator cuff tendons [23]. Subacromial decompression aims to remove the inflamed subacromial bursa and reduce compressive forces by removing bone from the anterior/lateral undersurface of the acromion [23]. Widening of the space for traversing tendons is believed to halt the pathological process of impingement [23]. Neer first described acromioplasty in 1972 and reported on its utility in treating chronic impingement syndrome [45].

The most common and consistent presenting symptom of shoulder impingement syndrome is shoulder pain [44]. Weakness of the shoulder and arm is a common secondary complaint [44]. Contact phenomenon of the coracoacromial arch with rotator cuff tendons is observed during all motions in nonpathologic situations [119]. Contact pressure between the coracoacromial arch and rotator cuff tendons increases during flexion, abduction, horizontal abduction, and extension [119]. The shortest acromiohumeral distance occurs at approximately 90 degrees of arm elevation [132].

In patients with subacromial impingement syndrome, the supraspinatus tendon is significantly thicker than in matched controls, with a mean difference of 0.6 mm [129]. The supraspinatus tendon occupation ratio (tendon thickness as a percentage of acromiohumeral distance) is greater than in matched controls, with a mean difference of 7.5% [129]. There are no significant differences in acromiohumeral distance between patients with subacromial impingement syndrome and matched controls [129]. The thickened supraspinatus tendon and greater occupation ratio support an intrinsic mechanism of pathology [129].

Excision of the coracoacromial ligament and acromioplasty increases the rotator cuff force required to maintain normal glenohumeral biomechanics by 25% to 30% at 150 to 200 N of loading [98]. The coracoacromial ligament has the ability to re-form relatively quickly after subacromial decompression or acromioplasty [58]. However, the regenerated coracoacromial ligament takes time to regain strength after these procedures [58].

Classification

Copeland-Levy: This classification is suggested to standardize terminology for subacromial impingement lesions [106].

Other Considerations: Anterior acromial spur formation is an age-dependent process, occurring in 6% of specimens ≤ 50 years and 30% of specimens ≥ 51 years [151]. Acromial morphology is independent of age and appears to be a primary anatomic characteristic [151]. Variations in acromial morphology contribute to impingement as primary, independent factors rather than the result of age-dependent processes [151].

Clinical Presentation

The most common and consistent presenting symptom of subacromial impingement is shoulder pain, with weakness of the shoulder and arm as a common secondary complaint [44]. A characteristic history of subacromial pain associated with specific activities or motions is used to diagnose the condition [90]. Patients typically present with a normal range of motion of the shoulder [90]. During clinical evaluation, other possible diagnoses such as frozen shoulder, full-thickness rotator cuff tears, and instability are ruled out [38]. Coracoid impingement should be included in the differential diagnosis when evaluating a patient with activity-related anterior shoulder pain [103].

Diagnosis of impingement syndrome is based on a history of pain in the anterior aspect of the shoulder, a “painful arc“ during elevation, and the presence of tenderness over the anterior cuff associated with a positive impingement sign [40]. Clinical criteria for shoulder impingement include: * A painful arc between 40° to 120° in abduction or flexion [39]. * Pain with active arm elevation [39]. * Tenderness to palpation of rotator cuff tendons [39]. * Resisted painful or weak shoulder abduction [39]. * Resisted or weak shoulder external rotation [39]. * A positive empty can test [39].

A typical positive impingement sign is present in the majority of patients, elicited by preventing scapular rotation and raising the arm in forced elevation to cause pain as the greater tuberosity presses the rotator cuff against the acromion [90]. A second positive impingement sign involves the elicitation of pain on simultaneous forward flexion of the humerus to 90 degrees [90]. Clinical criteria also include a positive test by Neer, Hawkins-Kennedy, Speed, or Jobe [39]. The Neer impingement test is performed if there is any doubt about the diagnosis [40].

An impingement test with lidocaine is included in clinical criteria [39]. Complete subsidence of pain after injection of local anaesthetic into the subacromial bursa is deemed an excellent response to the impingement test [40]. Marked diminution of pain after injection of local anaesthetic into the subacromial bursa is deemed a good response to the impingement test [40]. Little or no relief of pain after injection of local anaesthetic into the subacromial bursa is deemed a poor response to the impingement test [40].

Investigations

Plain radiography: Standardized plain films are almost always sufficient for initial shoulder evaluation, provided proper radiographic technique is employed [36]. The standard series includes orthogonal views: a true anteroposterior (AP) view in the scapular plane, a standard AP view, an axillary view, and a scapular Y view [87]. The true AP view in the scapular plane is taken with the x-ray beam perpendicular to the scapula and the arm in neutral rotation with slight abduction; this position visualizes the anterior greater tuberosity in profile and can reveal proximal humeral migration [87]. The standard AP view is taken with the arm in internal rotation, positioning the beam perpendicular to the coronal plane to visualize the posterior greater tuberosity and lesser tuberosity in profile [87]. The axillary view is essential for evaluating glenohumeral instability, glenoid morphology in osteoarthritis, and the relationship of the humeral head to the glenoid fossa [87]. Taken with the arm in the functional position of elevation, the axillary view—often called the “truth view”—demonstrates glenohumeral relationships, joint space narrowing, and posterior subluxation or “functional decentering” that may be obscured in adducted positions [36]. It also allows measurement of posterior subluxation relative to the scapular plane, glenoid face, or articular contact point, which reflects the centering of the net humeral joint reaction force [36]. Malcentering of this force leads to posterior instability, posterior glenoid wear, and “rocking horse” loosening of prosthetic glenoid components [36]. The scapular Y view visualizes the coracoacromial arch, revealing coracoacromial spurs associated with rotator cuff pathology, and serves as a reliable alternative for evaluating subluxation and dislocation [87]. It also identifies scapular body abnormalities such as osteochondromas or fractures and acromial shape [87]. Normal acromiohumeral distance is 7 to 14 mm, the glenohumeral joint space should be symmetric superiorly and inferiorly, and the coracoclavicular distance is normally 1.1 to 1.3 cm [87]. Neer classified acromial morphology as type I (flat), type II (curved), and type III (hooked); while type III morphology correlates with rotator cuff disease, no direct causal relationship has been demonstrated, and the classification shows relatively poor interobserver reliability [87]. Plain radiographs are often the only required studies for acute trauma, including fractures or dislocations, and can identify arthritis, calcific tendinitis, and osteolysis of the distal clavicle [86].

MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging is the modality of choice for evaluating the rotator cuff, biceps, and subacromial/subdeltoid bursa [86]. T2-weighted sequences provide better visualization of full-thickness rotator cuff tears [86], while T1-weighted sequences can reveal Hill-Sachs lesions and are often used with MR arthrograms for detailed joint surface assessment [86]. MRI is useful for identifying osteonecrosis of the humeral head or bone tumours [79]. The sensitivity of MRI for detecting full-thickness rotator cuff tears is 100%, with a specificity of 68%, positive predictive value of 85%, negative predictive value of 100%, and overall accuracy of 89% [87]. In the literature, MR accuracy for identifying labral and rotator cuff tears ranges from 70% to 100% [84]. Multi-planar imaging allows detailed evaluation of the glenoid, labrum, joint capsule, and rotator cuff in different planes [84].

MR Arthrography: MR arthrography (MRA) involves the injection of an intra-articular contrast agent, such as diluted gadolinium or saline, prior to MRI under fluoroscopic or ultrasound guidance [84]. By distending the joint capsule, MRA outlines cartilage, ligaments, and the labrum with contrast, increasing sensitivity for detecting tears [84]. MRA is considered the benchmark for evaluating labral tears but is rarely indicated for rotator cuff pathology [86]. Compared to traditional MRI, MRA increases both sensitivity and specificity for detecting injuries to the capsulolabral–ligamentous complex [84]. In a meta-analysis, MRA sensitivity for glenoid labral injuries was 88% and specificity 93%, versus MRI sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 87% [84]. In acute dislocation settings, joint effusion may outline structures similarly, making arthrography unnecessary [84]. MRA can demonstrate a patulous capsule in multidirectional instability and evaluate lesions of the rotator interval that may affect surgical planning [84]. Glenoid dysplasia, increased capsular cross-sectional area, and increased glenoid retroversion are associated with increased posterior labral tears and symptomatic instability [84]. Glenoid retroversion is significantly increased in patients with symptomatic posterior labral tears, though no significant association exists between instability and increased humeral head subluxation [84].

Positioning for MRI/MRA: With standard MRI or MRA, the shoulder is routinely positioned in neutral or partial external rotation [84]. Abduction and external rotation (ABER) is an alternative position utilized to increase sensitivity and specificity for detecting anteroinferior labroligamentous injury [84]. The sensitivity of MRA with the ABER position for detecting anteroinferior labral lesions is significantly higher than that of MRA in the neutral position [84]. MRA with the ABER position is more effective in identifying Perthes lesions than MRA in the neutral position [84]. Full routine MRI or MRA examination had similar accuracy as the ABER sequence in evaluating the anteroinferior labral–ligamentous complex [84]. Limited range of motion or pain may prohibit patients from performing the ABER provocative maneuver [84].

CT: Computed tomography is helpful for planning fracture surgery and shoulder joint replacement [79]. CT imaging is frequently used to evaluate fractures, assess bony lesions in recurrent instability cases, or perform preoperative templating for shoulder arthritis [86]. CT with three-dimensional reconstructions is the advanced imaging study of choice for determining the extent of glenoid bone loss in the setting of shoulder instability [87]. CT arthrography is indicated when MRI or MR arthrography is contraindicated, such as in patients with pacemakers or vascular clips [86]. A disadvantage of CT scans is that they are taken with the arm in the adducted position, unlike the axillary truth view [36].

Ultrasonography: Ultrasonography is a low-cost alternative to MRI and arthrography for evaluating skeletal and soft-tissue structures of the shoulder [86]. It provides immediate, real-time visualization of the rotator cuff, biceps tendon, and calcific deposits [86]. Ultrasound is a simple and accurate test for identifying rotator cuff tears and calcific tendinitis [79]. It can be used to measure the subacromial space, detect atrophy of rotator cuff muscles, and guide injections or barbotage of calcific deposits [86, 79]. The sensitivity of ultrasonography for detecting full-thickness rotator cuff tears is 98%, with a specificity of 80%, positive predictive value of 90%, negative predictive value of 95%, and overall accuracy of 94% [87]. Ultrasonography is highly operator-dependent and is not as useful for evaluating labral tears or rotator cuff tears that are very small or larger than 3 cm [86].

Other Considerations: Imaging is an essential tool for evaluating patients with shoulder pain, and understanding the extent of injury is key to successful management [48]. The purpose of imaging is to establish the diagnosis, determine the severity of pathoanatomy, assist in surgical planning, and illustrate the condition to the patient [36]. Unless a specific research protocol is in place, the temptation to “overimage” should be resisted, obtaining only the scans necessary for patient care [36]. Many “axillary views” sent for consultation are taken without standardization, making it impossible to determine important features of the glenohumeral joint [36]. When taken properly, standardized anteroposterior and axillary views indicate cartilage space thickness, relative positions of the humeral head and glenoid, presence of osteophytes, degree of osteopenia, and extent of bony deformity and erosion [36]. Arthroscopy is useful for diagnosing and treating subacromial impingement, intra-articular lesions, detachment of the glenoid labrum, and rotator cuff tears [79]. In a prospective study of shoulder pain in primary care, rotator cuff and subacromial bursa pathology were the most common findings on ultrasound and MRA [148]. Younger age, lower BMI, more functional capacity, a shorter symptomatic period, reversible changes on MRI, and higher Constant and ASES scores at first evaluation were good prognostic factors for the natural course of subacromial impingement syndrome [159]. Preoperative imaging with 3D CT may assist surgeons in performing arthroscopic suprascapular notch decompression [156]. The diagnosis of multidirectional instability is a clinical one, and the need for expensive and/or invasive imaging should be weighed against the information gained [84].

Treatment

Non-Operative

Conservative management remains the initial line of treatment for subacromial impingement. Adding a large dose of shoulder strengthening to current nonoperative care did not result in superior shoulder-specific patient-reported outcomes [47]. Surgical intervention is generally considered when conservative treatment has failed [21].

Operative

Indications: Subacromial decompression with bursectomy and acromioplasty is the standard of care for refractory subacromial impingement [30]. Acromioplasty may be an effective treatment option for subacromial impingement refractory to conservative therapy [45]. Arthroscopic subacromial decompression is presented as an alternative to open anterior acromioplasty in advanced stage II and selected cases of stage III impingement syndrome [31]. The impingement test can be used as a predictor of outcome for patients with impingement syndrome treated by arthroscopic subacromial decompression [26].

Surgical Approach / Technique: Subacromial decompression with more than 90 % excellent and good results after four and 78 % after ten years is an adequate treatment of impingement syndromes when conservative treatment has failed [21]. In terms of subjective improvement, overall satisfaction, UCLA score, and shoulder strength, the two techniques were equivalent [34]. There was no demonstrable benefit to laser assistance in arthroscopic subacromial decompression procedures [99]. Subacromial decompression via open acromioplasty and tuberoplasty, combined with glenosphere exchange, successfully resolved symptomatic subacromial impingement and restored function in a patient with acromion fracture nonunion following reverse shoulder arthroplasty [61]. A modified Neer acromioplasty, subacromial decompression, and débridement of massive, irreparable lesions of the supraspinatus and infraspinatus tendons was performed in fifty-seven patients [46]. The results, as rated on the basis of pain, function, range of motion, strength, and satisfaction of the patient, were satisfactory in forty-four shoulders (83 per cent) and unsatisfactory in nine (17 per cent) [46]. The active forward flexion of the shoulder improved from an average of 105 degrees preoperatively to an average of 140 degrees postoperatively [46].

Pain Management: Compared with placebo, SABER-Bupivacaine reduced pain and opioid analgesic consumption over 72 hours after arthroscopic subacromial decompression and prolonged the time to first use of opioid rescue analgesia [110]. Patients treated with SSN blocks had less pain overall, which led to a decreased need for analgesics in comparison to the subacromial infiltration and placebo groups [116]. Patient-controlled lidocaine analgesia in the subacromial space appears to be a safe method for achieving high levels of pain control in patients undergoing an acromioplasty [142]. Continuous subacromial infiltration of 0.25% bupivacaine at a rate of 6 mL/h is clinically safe but ineffective for postoperative pain relief after open acromioplasty and rotator cuff repair, as it had no effect on pain perception or morphine requirements [150]. The use of a pain pump after arthroscopic subacromial decompression did not have any long-term effects on the patients' recovery, return to work, or final result at the minimum 2-year follow-up [32].

Other Considerations: In patients with symptoms consistent with shoulder impingement syndrome, arthroscopic subacromial decompression did not differ from diagnostic arthroscopy (placebo control) for shoulder pain at 24 months [24]. The utility of acromioplasty at the time of rotator cuff repair has come into question, with new studies showing no significant benefit [45]. There is no need to perform subacromial decompression in partial bursal-sided rotator cuff repairs to obtain a good result [100]. Despite limitations in existing literature, there is a consensus among shoulder experts that partial-thickness rotator cuff tears should be aggressively treated in active athletes due to their unfavorable natural history and the success of accepted surgical algorithms [56]. Patients treated by debridement of the calcific deposit and concomitant subacromial decompression required a longer time to return to unrestricted activity without pain [15].

Complications

Specific Surgical Complications

Heterotopic Ossification: Heterotopic bone formation was a frequent complication in the early years of open treatment for impingement syndrome [112]. Incomplete acromial resections, where the deltoid is reattached to a raw bone surface, have a propensity to reconstitute the acromion [112]. Recurrent acromial bone spurs can also occur after open subacromial decompression [112]. Severe heterotopic ossification has been reported following arthroscopic acromioplasty [60]. At one year following such severe ossification, physical examination revealed no pain with shoulder motion, with the ability to forward flex the arm to 90° and internally rotate to place the hand in the front pocket [60].

Thromboembolism: Pulmonary embolism due to subclavian venous thrombosis has been reported following rotator cuff tendon repair [162].

Acromial Fracture: Prior subacromial decompression is an independent risk factor for acromial stress fracture after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, conferring a 26% higher risk [164].

Failure and Revision Etiologies

In a review of 105 patients with failed arthroscopic subacromial decompression, 91 etiologies for failure were identified in 41 shoulders undergoing revision surgery [155]. Twenty-one shoulders had continued impingement from inadequate decompression [155]. Fifty-four diagnostic errors were identified in the cohort [155]. Diagnoses contributing to failure included rotator cuff tear (20), acromioclavicular joint arthritis (12), glenohumeral instability (20), glenohumeral osteoarthritis (1), and humeral head osteonecrosis (1) [155].

Sixteen operative and postoperative complications were identified in the failed arthroscopic subacromial decompression cohort [155]. Complications contributing to failure included deltoid pull-off (2), acromion fracture (1), suprascapular nerve compression (1), painful neuroma (1), and adhesive capsulitis or adhesions (11) [155]. Patients with multiple diagnoses or complications, or who had undergone multiple surgeries, had significantly worse preoperative pain and ASES scores [155].

General Risks and Outcomes

Subacromial decompression surgery probably carries a small risk of serious harms [5]. In a randomized, placebo surgery controlled clinical trial, there was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between arthroscopic subacromial decompression and diagnostic arthroscopy [3].

Recovery

Light activity (weeks): More than 90% of patients manage to return to driving within 4 weeks and to work within 6 weeks following arthroscopic subacromial decompression and acromioclavicular joint excision [97].

Full activity (months): Most patients returned to their former sports activities, including 90% of those in overhead sports and 100% of those in shoulder-sparing and contact sports [59].

Rehabilitation protocol: A study was unable to show any beneficial effect of physiotherapist-supervised rehabilitation after arthroscopic subacromial decompression of the shoulder [108]. Voluntary activation of the infraspinatus is impaired in patients with subacromial pain syndrome and improves immediately following pain relief from injection and after a 6-week exercise program [109]. Specific exercise treatment for patients with subacromial pain was effective and reduced the need for surgery with maintained results after 10 years [111].

Functional milestones: Recovery of subjective shoulder function required almost 3 months on average in patients undergoing arthroscopic removal of chronic symptomatic calcifications without acromioplasty [53].

Other Considerations: The functional outcome 6 years after arthroscopic subacromial decompression is not obviously related to the preoperative degree of cuff pathology, even if a total rupture of small size is present [25]. A partial rotator cuff tear may not need to be addressed if found coincidentally at surgery, particularly if consented for a subacromial decompression alone, as both groups had a similar final outcome [12]. The coracoacromial ligament has the ability to re-form relatively quickly after subacromial decompression or acromioplasty but takes time to regain strength [58]. Results were much slower and overall poorer in patients with whiplash injury compared to controls after arthroscopic subacromial decompression [143].

Key Evidence

• [L1] Subacromial decompression did not provide any clinical or structurally substantial benefit for the treatment of subacromial pain syndrome or the surgical repair of rotator cuff tears. [1] (10.2106/jbjs.rvw.19.00045)
• [L5] Proper indications for shoulder subacromial decompression result in excellent outcomes. [2] (10.1016/j.arthro.2021.04.023)
• [L1] Both arthroscopic subacromial decompression and diagnostic arthroscopy resulted in significant improvements in pain and functional outcomes with no difference in the incidence of adverse events. [3] (10.1136/bmj.k2860)
• [L4] Isolated arthroscopic subacromial decompression is effective in 70% to 75% of cases. [4] (10.1016/j.otsr.2014.09.006)
• [L1] Subacromial decompression surgery provided no important benefit compared with placebo surgery or exercise therapy, and probably carries a small risk of serious harms. [5] (10.1136/bjsports-2018-100486)
• [L5] There is no current and strong evidence to either support subacromial decompression or nonoperative treatment, requiring surgeons to rely on clinical judgment and careful patient selection. [6] (10.1016/j.arthro.2020.03.024)
• [L1] The guideline panel makes a strong recommendation against subacromial decompression surgery for adults with subacromial pain syndrome. [7] (10.1136/bmj.l294)
• [L5] The treatment of subacromial impingement syndrome remains controversial, with conservative management being the initial mainstay and surgery reserved for failures. [8] (10.1111/j.1758-5740.2012.00205.x)
• [L3] Patients improved after undergoing subacromial decompression regardless of underlying depression or depressive symptoms. [9] (10.1016/j.jseint.2023.11.012)
• [L5] The panel agreed that subacromial decompression is a good choice for shoulder impingement if there is evidence of mechanical impingement with pain not responding to nonsurgical measures. [10] (10.1016/j.arthro.2021.09.031)
• [L3] The long term clinical outcomes resulted significantly higher in patients treated only with RCR respect the ones in patients underwent to RCR with subacromial decompression. [11] (10.1186/s12891-019-3032-z)
• [L4] Both groups had a similar final outcome revealing that a partial rotator cuff tear may not need to be addressed if found coincidentally at surgery, particularly if consented for a subacromial decompression alone. [12] (10.4103/0973-6042.102558)
• [L1] Five randomized trials found that formal subacromial decompression does not result in improved clinical outcomes up to 2 years after rotator cuff repair. [13] (10.1016/j.arthro.2012.06.003)
• [L5] Nonoperative treatment is appropriate as initial therapy, while operative management including arthroscopic subacromial decompression, debridement, or repair is considered when nonoperative treatment fails. [14] (10.5435/00124635-199901000-00004)
• [L3] Patients treated by debridement of the calcific deposit and concomitant subacromial decompression required a longer time to return to unrestricted activity without pain. [15] (10.1016/j.jse.2010.10.038)
• [L4] Subacromial decompression leads to significant improvement in function and quality of life in a cost effective manner. [16] (10.1308/003588414x14055925061478)
• [L2] This study may aid in improving patient outcome and especially patient selection for subacromial decompression. [17] (10.1007/s00167-013-2386-2)
• [L1] Arthroscopic subacromial decompression provided no benefit over diagnostic arthroscopy or exercise therapy on return to work in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome. [18] (10.1186/s12891-021-04768-7)
• [L4] Arthroscopic subacromial decompression is a valid treatment, reducing pain and improving quality of life for patients selected for surgery according to the Danish national guidelines. [19] (10.1016/j.jse.2017.03.028)
• [L4] The subacromial decompression with more than 90 % excellent and good resuits after four and 78 % after ten years is an adequate treatment of impingement syndromes when conservative treatment has failed. [21] (10.1016/s1058-2746(96)80232-1)
• [L1] [23] (10.1002/14651858.cd005619.pub3)
• [L1] In patients with symptoms consistent with shoulder impingement syndrome, arthroscopic subacromial decompression did not differ from diagnostic arthroscopy (placebo control) for shoulder pain at 24 months. [24] (10.2106/jbjs.18.01342)
• [L4] We conclude that the functional outcome 6 years after arthroscopic subacromial decompression is not obviously related to the preoperative degree of cuff pathology, even if a total rupture of small size is present. [25] (10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90094-0)
• [L3] Our evidence indicates that the impingement test can be used as a predictor of outcome for patients with impingement syndrome treated by arthroscopic subacromial decompression. [26] (10.1016/j.jse.2003.12.006)
• [L1] At short-term follow-up, subacromial decompression did not seem to significantly affect the outcome of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. [27] (10.1016/j.arthro.2006.10.011)
• [L5] Subacromial decompression with bursectomy and acromioplasty is the standard of care for refractory subacromial impingement. [30] (10.1016/j.eats.2023.04.012)
• [L4] Arthroscopic subacromial decompression is presented as an alternative to open anterior acromioplasty in advanced stage II and selected cases of stage III impingement syndrome. [31] (10.1016/j.arthro.2009.10.003)
• [L2] According to this study, the use of a pain pump after arthroscopic subacromial decompression did not have any long-term effects on the patients' recovery, return to work, or final result at the minimum 2-year follow-up. [32] (10.1016/j.arthro.2008.07.013)
• [L1] In terms of subjective improvement, overall satisfaction, UCLA score, and shoulder strength, the two techniques were equivalent. [34] (10.1067/mse.2002.120915)
• [L1] [38] (10.1186/s13063-015-0725-y)
• [L1] [39] (10.1136/bjsports-2016-096515)
• [L3] [40] (10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90134-9)
• [L5] Arthroscopic treatment should no longer be offered to people with subacromial impingement as surgery offers no discernible benefits but may result in harm, and the weight of evidence supports nonoperative management or no treatment. [41] (10.1016/j.arthro.2022.03.017)
• [L4] The most common and consistent presenting symptom is shoulder pain, with weakness of the shoulder and arm as a common secondary complaint. [44] (10.1016/s1058-2746(95)80145-6)
• [Paper] [45] (10.1016/j.ocl.2013.12.003)
• [L4] [46] (10.2106/00004623-199506000-00006)
• [L1] Adding a large dose of shoulder strengthening to current nonoperative care for patients with subacromial impingement did not result in superior shoulder-specific patient-reported outcomes. [47] (10.1177/03635465211016008)
• [L4] Imaging is an essential tool for evaluation of patients with shoulder pain; understanding the extent of an injury with imaging is key to successful management. [48] (10.1016/j.csm.2013.03.009)
• [L3] The acromial morphology classification system is an unreliable method to assess the acromion, and the acromial index shows no association with the presence of rotator cuff disease. [49] (10.1016/j.jse.2011.09.028)
• [L1] Considering the lack of measurable benefit in conjunction with the significantly higher costs identified, we cannot recommend laser assistance in arthroscopic subacromial decompression procedures. [50] (10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90142-8)
• [L4] However, recovery of subjective shoulder function required almost 3 months on average. [53] (10.1177/2325967114533646)
• [L5] Despite limitations in existing literature, there is a consensus among shoulder experts that partial-thickness rotator cuff tears should be aggressively treated in active athletes due to their unfavorable natural history and the success of accepted surgical algorithms. [56] (10.1177/0363546505280213)
• [L4] It appears that the ligament does have the ability to re-form relatively quickly after subacromial decompression or acromioplasty but takes time to regain strength. [58] (10.1016/j.jse.2003.09.016)
• [L4] Most patients returned to their former sports activities, including 90% of those in overhead sports and 100% of those in shoulder-sparing and contact sports. [59] (10.1016/s1058-2746(95)80073-5)
• [L5] Physical examination at 1 year revealed no pain with shoulder motion and the ability to forward flex the arm to 90° and internally rotate to place the hand in the front pocket. [60] (10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90083-6)
• [L4] Subacromial decompression via open acromioplasty and tuberoplasty, combined with glenosphere exchange, successfully resolved symptomatic subacromial impingement and restored function in a patient with acromion fracture nonunion following reverse shoulder arthroplasty. [61] (10.1016/j.xrrt.2024.11.003)
• [L4] [90] (10.2106/00004623-199072020-00003)
• [L3] The results obtained in the present study suggest that more than 90% of the patients manage to return to driving within 4 weeks and to work within 6 weeks following arthroscopic subacromial decompression and acromio-clavicular joint excision. [97] (10.1111/j.1758-5740.2010.00048.x)
• [L5] At 150 to 200 N of loading, CAL excision and acromioplasty increase the rotator cuff force required to maintain normal glenohumeral biomechanics by 25% to 30%. [98] (10.1016/j.jse.2015.10.022)
• [L1] There was no demonstrable benefit to laser assistance in arthroscopic subacromial decompression procedures. [99] (10.1016/s1058-2746(96)80492-7)
• [L5] There is no need to perform subacromial decompression in partial bursal-sided rotator cuff repairs to obtain a good result. [100] (10.1016/j.arthro.2017.02.015)
• [L4] Coracoid impingement should be included in the differential diagnosis when evaluating a patient with activity-related anterior shoulder pain. [103] (10.1177/03635465000280010501)
• [L4] Hence, we suggest the Copeland-Levy classification be used to standardize terminology of the subacromial impingement lesion. [106] (10.1016/j.jse.2017.07.018)
• [L1] This study was unable to show any beneficial effect of physiotherapist-supervised rehabilitation after arthroscopic subacromial decompression of the shoulder. [108] (10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90000-9)
• [L2] Voluntary activation of the infraspinatus is impaired in patients with subacromial pain syndrome and improves immediately following pain relief from injection and after a 6-week exercise program. [109] (10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.020)
• [L1] Compared with placebo, SABER-Bupivacaine reduced pain and opioid analgesic consumption over 72 hours after arthroscopic subacromial decompression and prolonged the time to first use of opioid rescue analgesia. [110] (10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-21-00287)
• [L2] Specific exercise treatment for patients with subacromial pain was effective and reduced the need for surgery with maintained results after 10 years. [111] (10.1016/j.jse.2024.10.027)
• [L5] [112] (10.1016/s1058-2746(05)80040-0)
• [L1] Patients treated with SSN blocks had less pain overall, which led to a decreased need for analgesics in comparison to the subacromial infiltration and placebo groups. [116] (10.1016/j.arthro.2011.05.016)
• [L5] Contact phenomenon of the coracoacromial arch was observed during all motions, with contact pressure increasing during flexion, abduction, horizontal abduction, and extension. [119] (10.1016/j.jse.2009.12.006)
• [L3] [129] (10.1007/s00167-013-2542-8)
• [L5] The shortest acromiohumeral distance was at approximately 90 degrees of arm elevation. [132] (10.1016/j.jse.2011.11.023)
• [L3] Patient-controlled lidocaine analgesia in the subacromial space appears to be a safe method for achieving high levels of pain control in patients undergoing an acromioplasty. [142] (10.1067/mse.2000.104092)
• [L3] Although there was an improvement in shoulder scores after Arthroscopic Subacromial decompression, results were much slower and overall poorer in patients with whiplash injury compared to controls. [143] (10.1111/j.1758-5740.2012.00199.x)
• [L2] Rotator cuff and subacromial bursa pathology were the most common findings on ultrasound and MRA. [148] (10.1186/1471-2474-12-119)
• [L1] Continuous subacromial infiltration of 0.25% bupivacaine at a rate of 6 mL/h is clinically safe but ineffective for postoperative pain relief after open acromioplasty and rotator cuff repair, as it had no effect on pain perception or morphine requirements. [150] (10.1016/j.jse.2004.04.005)
• [Paper] [151] (10.1016/s1058-2746(96)80349-1)
• [L4] [155] (10.1016/s1058-2746(98)90099-4)
• [L5] Preoperative imaging with 3D CT may assist surgeons in performing arthroscopic SSN decompression. [156] (10.1016/j.jse.2014.07.018)
• [L2] Younger age, lower BMI, more functional capacity, a shorter symptomatic period, reversible changes on MRI, and higher Constant and ASES scores at the first evaluation were good prognostic factors for the natural course of subacromial impingement syndrome. [159] (10.1016/j.jse.2015.06.007)
• [L4] This is the first reported case of pulmonary embolism due to subclavian venous thrombosis following rotator cuff tendon repair. [162] (10.1016/j.jse.2008.02.001)
• [L3] Prior subacromial decompression is an independent risk factor for acromial stress fracture after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, conferring a 26% higher risk. [164] (10.1016/j.jseint.2025.05.014)

See Also

• Rotator Cuff
• Rotator Cuff Repair
• Os Acromiale
• Proximal Humerus Fracture
• Frozen Shoulder
• Fractures
• Calcific Tendinitis
• Shoulder Arthritis
• Shoulder Instability
• Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty
• Total shoulder arthroplasty

References

[1] Subacromial Decompression Is Not Beneficial for the Management of Rotator Cuff Disease. JBJS Reviews. 2020. DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.rvw.19.00045

[2] Proper Indications for Shoulder Subacromial Decompression Result in Excellent Outcomes. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.04.023

[3] Subacromial decompression versus diagnostic arthroscopy for shoulder impingement: randomised, placebo surgery controlled clinical trial. BMJ. 2018. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k2860

[4] Failed subacromial decompression. Risk factors. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research. 2014. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2014.09.006

[5] Subacromial decompression surgery for adults with shoulder pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2019. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-100486

[6] No Indications for Subacromial Decompression in Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy: A Level I Evidence Clinical Guideline. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.03.024

[7] Subacromial decompression surgery for adults with shoulder pain: a clinical practice guideline. BMJ. 2019. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l294

[8] Current Concepts in Subacromial Impingement and the Role of Acromioplasty. Shoulder & Elbow. 2012. DOI: 10.1111/j.1758-5740.2012.00205.x

[9] Arthroscopic subacromial decompression improved outcomes in situationally depressed patients compared to clinically depressed or nondepressed patients. JSES International. 2024. DOI: 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.11.012

[10] Subacromial Decompression in Patients With Shoulder Impingement With an Intact Rotator Cuff: An Expert Consensus Statement Using the Modified Delphi Technique Comparing North American to European Shoulder Surgeons. Arthroscopy. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.09.031

[11] Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without subacromial decompression is safe and effective: a clinical study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2020. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-019-3032-z

[12] Mid-term results of arthroscopic subacromial decompression in patients with or without partial thickness rotator cuff tears. International Journal of Shoulder Surgery. 2012. DOI: 10.4103/0973-6042.102558

[13] The Changing Role of Acromioplasty. Arthroscopy. 2012. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.06.003

[14] Partial-Thickness Tears of the Rotator Cuff: Evaluation and Management. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 1999. DOI: 10.5435/00124635-199901000-00004

[15] Calcific tendonitis of the shoulder: is subacromial decompression in combination with removal of the calcific deposit beneficial?. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2011. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.10.038

[16] Does arthroscopic subacromial decompression improve quality of life. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England. 2015. DOI: 10.1308/003588414x14055925061478

[17] Predictive value of preoperative clinical examination for subacromial decompression in impingement syndrome. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2013. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2386-2

[18] Return to work after subacromial decompression, diagnostic arthroscopy, or exercise therapy for shoulder impingement: a randomised, placebo-surgery controlled FIMPACT clinical trial with five-year follow-up. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2021. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-021-04768-7

[19] Acromioplasty in patients selected for operation by national guidelines. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.03.028

[21] Subacromial decompression for impingement syndrom of the shoulder: 4- and 10-year-follow-up in comparison. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1996. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(96)80232-1

[23] Subacromial decompression surgery for rotator cuff disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2019. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd005619.pub3

[24] In Shoulder Impingement Syndrome, Subacromial Decompression Did Not Differ from Diagnostic Arthroscopy for Shoulder Pain at 24 Months. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2019. DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.18.01342

[25] The influence of cuff pathology on shoulder function after arthroscopic subacromial decompression: A 3- and 6-year follow-up study. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1999. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90094-0

[26] Can the impingement test predict outcome after arthroscopic subacromial decompression?. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2004. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2003.12.006

[27] Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair With and Without Subacromial Decompression: A Prospective Randomized Study. Arthroscopy. 2007. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2006.10.011

[30] In‐Office Nano‐Arthroscopy of the Shoulder with Acromioplasty. Arthroscopy Techniques. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.eats.2023.04.012

[31] Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression: Analysis of One‐ to Three‐Year Results. Arthroscopy. 2010. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2009.10.003

[32] Long‐term Effect of the Use of a Pain Pump After Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression. Arthroscopy. 2008. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2008.07.013

[34] Arthroscopic versus open acromioplasty: A prospective, randomized, blinded study. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2002. DOI: 10.1067/mse.2002.120915

[36] Rockwood And Matsen S The Shoulder. Arthroscopic Management of Prearthritic and Arthritic Conditions of the Shoulder and the Postarthroplasty Shoulder > Radiographic Evaluation.

[38] The CSAW Study (Can Shoulder Arthroscopy Work?) – a placebo-controlled surgical intervention trial assessing the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthroscopic subacromial decompression for shoulder pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2015. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-015-0725-y

[39] Effectiveness of conservative interventions including exercise, manual therapy and medical management in adults with shoulder impingement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2017. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096515

[40] Arthroscopic subacromial decompression: Results and factors affecting outcome. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1999. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90134-9

[41] Editorial Commentary : Arthroscopic Treatment Should No Longer Be Offered to People With Subacromial Impingement. Arthroscopy. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2022.03.017

[44] Anterior acromionectomy with acromioplasty for the treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1995. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(95)80145-6

[45] The Role of Acromioplasty for Rotator Cuff Problems. Orthopedic Clinics of North America. 2014. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2013.12.003

[46] Débridement of degenerative, irreparable lesions of the rotator cuff.. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. 1995. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199506000-00006

[47] Effectiveness of Adding a Large Dose of Shoulder Strengthening to Current Nonoperative Care for Subacromial Impingement: A Pragmatic, Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial (SExSI Trial). The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2021. DOI: 10.1177/03635465211016008

[48] Imaging of the Shoulder with Arthroscopic Correlation. Clinics in Sports Medicine. 2013. DOI: 10.1016/j.csm.2013.03.009

[49] Relationship of radiographic acromial characteristics and rotator cuff disease: a prospective investigation of clinical, radiographic, and sonographic findings. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2012. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.09.028

[50] Cost-benefit comparison: Holmium laser versus electrocautery in arthroscopic acromioplasty. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1999. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90142-8

[53] Arthroscopic Removal of Chronic Symptomatic Calcifications of the Supraspinatus Tendon Without Acromioplasty. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2014. DOI: 10.1177/2325967114533646

[56] Partial-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2005. DOI: 10.1177/0363546505280213

[58] Mechanical properties of regenerated coracoacromial ligament after subacromial decompression. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2004. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2003.09.016

[59] Does arthroscopic subacromial decompression allow return to shoulder demanding activities?. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1995. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(95)80073-5

[60] Severe heterotopic ossification after arthroscopic acromioplasty: A case report. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1999. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90083-6

[61] Subacromial decompression for impingement syndrome following type II acromion fracture nonunion. JSES Reviews, Reports, and Techniques. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.xrrt.2024.11.003

[62] Rockwood And Matsen S The Shoulder. Shoulder and Elbow Specialty Clinic Workers’ Survey > ANATOMY.

[63] A Lange Medical Book Current Diagnosis Treatment In Orthopedics Fifth Edition. 2Musculoskeletal Trauma Surgery > SHOULDER AND ARM INJURIES.

[65] Aaos Comprehensive Orthopaedic Review 3. Anatomy of the Shoulder, Arm, and Elbow > I. Shoulder.

[66] Rockwood And Matsen S The Shoulder. Developmental Anatomy of the Shoulder and Anatomy of the Glenohumeral Joint > Bursae.

[68] Rockwood And Matsen S The Shoulder. Developmental Anatomy of the Shoulder and Anatomy of the Glenohumeral Joint > EDITOR COMMENTARY.

[70] Apley And Solomon S Concise System Of Orthopaedics And Trauma. DISORDERS OF THE ROTATOR CUFF.

[72] Rockwood And Matsen S The Shoulder. Developmental Anatomy of the Shoulder and Anatomy of the Glenohumeral Joint > Development of Individual Regions.

[76] Miller S Review Of Orthopaedics. Genetics of musculoskeletal conditions and abnormalities are summarized in Table 1.27 > UPPER EXTREMITY > SHOULDER.

[79] Apley And Solomon S Concise System Of Orthopaedics And Trauma. INVESTIGATION.

[84] Rockwood And Green S Fractures In Adults. 29: Principles of Nonunion and Bone Defect Treatment > Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Arthrography.

[86] Orthopaedic Knowledge Update 13 Ebook Without Multimedia. Shoulder Anatomy and Biomechanics, Clinical Evaluation, Imaging > Clinical Evaluation > Imaging.

[87] Aaos Comprehensive Orthopaedic Review 3. Imaging of the Shoulder and Elbow > I. Shoulder.

[90] Arthroscopic acromioplasty for lesions of the rotator cuff.. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. 1990. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199072020-00003

[97] Return to Work and Driving following Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression and Acromioclavicular Joint Excision. Shoulder & Elbow. 2010. DOI: 10.1111/j.1758-5740.2010.00048.x

[98] The effect of coracoacromial ligament excision and acromioplasty on the amount of rotator cuff force production necessary to restore intact glenohumeral biomechanics. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.10.022

[99] Arthroscopic subacromial decompression: A randomized, prospective study comparing a holmium laser vs. An electrocautery. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1996. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(96)80492-7

[100] Editorial Commentary: Subacromial Decompression Is Unnecessary in Most Routine Rotator Cuff Repairs. Arthroscopy. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2017.02.015

[103] Coracoid Impingement. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2000. DOI: 10.1177/03635465000280010501

[106] Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the Copeland-Levy classification for arthroscopic evaluation of subacromial impingement. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.07.018

[108] Self-training versus physiotherapist-supervised rehabilitation of the shoulder in patients treated with arthroscopic subacromial decompression: A clinical randomized study. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1999. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(99)90000-9

[109] Voluntary activation is impaired in subacromial pain syndrome but improves with pain relief and exercise. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.020

[110] SABER-Bupivacaine Reduces Postoperative Pain and Opioid Consumption After Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial. JAAOS: Global Research and Reviews. 2022. DOI: 10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-21-00287

[111] No need for subacromial decompression in responders to specific exercise treatment: a 10-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.10.027

[112] Recurrent acromial bone spur after open subacromial decompression. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1995. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(05)80040-0

[116] A Randomized Study of the Effectiveness of Suprascapular Nerve Block in Patient Satisfaction and Outcome After Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression. Arthroscopy. 2011. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2011.05.016

[119] Contact between the coracoacromial arch and the rotator cuff tendons in nonpathologic situations: A cadaveric study. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2010. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.12.006

[129] Supraspinatus tendon and subacromial space parameters measured on ultrasonographic imaging in subacromial impingement syndrome. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2013. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2542-8

[132] The effects of arm elevation on the 3-dimensional acromiohumeral distance: a biplane fluoroscopy study with normative data. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2012. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.11.023

[142] Patient-controlled lidocaine analgesia for acromioplasty surgery. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2000. DOI: 10.1067/mse.2000.104092

[143] Outcome of Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression for Shoulder Impingement Syndrome after a Whiplash Type Injury. Shoulder & Elbow. 2012. DOI: 10.1111/j.1758-5740.2012.00199.x

[148] A prospective study of shoulder pain in primary care: Prevalence of imaged pathology and response to guided diagnostic blocks. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2011. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-12-119

[150] Continuous subacromial bupivacaine infusion for postoperative analgesia after open acromioplasty and rotator cuff repair: Preliminary results. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2004. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2004.04.005

[151] Acrominal spur and morphological changes of the rotator cuff. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1996. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(96)80349-1

[155] 39 The surgical treatment of failed arthroscopic subacromial decompression. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 1998. DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(98)90099-4

[156] Arthroscopic decompression at the suprascapular notch: a radiographic and anatomic roadmap. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.07.018

[159] Medium-term natural history of subacromial impingement syndrome. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.06.007

[162] Pulmonary embolism after acromioplasty and rotator cuff repair. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2008. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2008.02.001

[164] Prior subacromial decompression is a significant risk factor for development of acromial stress fracture after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. JSES International. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jseint.2025.05.014