Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007 Jul-Aug;16(4):469-76. Epub 2007 Feb 22.

Part II: Biomechanical assessment for a footprint-restoring transosseous-equivalent rotator cuff repair technique compared with a double-row repair technique.

Author information

1
Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic, Los Angeles, CA, USA. mcp16@columbia.edu

Abstract

We hypothesized that a transosseous-equivalent repair would demonstrate improved tensile strength and gap formation between the tendon and tuberosity when compared with a double-row technique. In 6 fresh-frozen human shoulders, a transosseous-equivalent rotator cuff repair was performed: a suture limb from each of two medial anchors was bridged over the tendon and fixed laterally with an interference screw. In 6 contralateral matched-pair specimens, a double-row repair was performed. For all repairs, a materials testing machine was used to load each repair cyclically from 10 N to 180 N for 30 cycles; each repair underwent tensile testing to measure failure loads at a deformation rate of 1 mm/sec. Gap formation between the tendon edge and insertion was measured with a video digitizing system. The mean ultimate load to failure was significantly greater for the transosseous-equivalent technique (443.0 +/- 87.8 N) compared with the double-row technique (299.2 +/- 52.5 N) (P = .043). Gap formation during cyclic loading was not significantly different between the transosseous-equivalent and double-row techniques, with mean values of 3.74 +/- 1.51 mm and 3.79 +/- 0.68 mm, respectively (P = .95). Stiffness for all cycles was not statistically different between the two constructs (P > .40). The transosseous-equivalent rotator cuff repair technique improves ultimate failure loads when compared with a double-row technique. Gap formation is similar for both techniques. A transosseous-equivalent repair helps restore footprint dimensions and provides a stronger repair than the double-row technique, which may help optimize healing biology.

PMID:
17321158
DOI:
10.1016/j.jse.2006.09.011
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center