HYPOTHESIS: We assessed bone-tendon contact surface and pressure with a continuous and reversible measurement system comparing 3 different double- and single-row techniques of cuff repair with simulation of different joint positions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reproduced a medium supraspinatus tear in 24 human cadaveric shoulders. For the 12 right shoulders, single-row suture (SRS) and then double-row bridge suture (DRBS) were used. For the 12 left shoulders, DRBS and then double-row cross suture (DRCS) were used. Measurements were performed before, during, and after knot tying and then with different joint positions. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in contact surface with the DRBS technique compared with the SRS technique and with the DRCS technique compared with the SRS or DRBS technique. There was a significant increase in contact pressure with the DRBS technique and DRCS technique compared with the SRS technique but no difference between the DRBS technique and DRCS technique. CONCLUSIONS: The DRCS technique seems to be superior to the DRBS and SRS techniques in terms of bone-tendon contact surface and pressure. Copyright 2010 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
HYPOTHESIS: We assessed bone-tendon contact surface and pressure with a continuous and reversible measurement system comparing 3 different double- and single-row techniques of cuff repair with simulation of different joint positions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reproduced a medium supraspinatus tear in 24 human cadaveric shoulders. For the 12 right shoulders, single-row suture (SRS) and then double-row bridge suture (DRBS) were used. For the 12 left shoulders, DRBS and then double-row cross suture (DRCS) were used. Measurements were performed before, during, and after knot tying and then with different joint positions. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in contact surface with the DRBS technique compared with the SRS technique and with the DRCS technique compared with the SRS or DRBS technique. There was a significant increase in contact pressure with the DRBS technique and DRCS technique compared with the SRS technique but no difference between the DRBS technique and DRCS technique. CONCLUSIONS: The DRCS technique seems to be superior to the DRBS and SRS techniques in terms of bone-tendon contact surface and pressure. Copyright 2010 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Taku Hatta; Hugo Giambini; Alexander W Hooke; Chunfeng Zhao; John W Sperling; Scott P Steinmann; Nobuyuki Yamamoto; Eiji Itoi; Kai-Nan An Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2016-05-04 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: H El-Azab; S Buchmann; K Beitzel; S Waldt; Andreas B Imhoff Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2010-09-08 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Caellagh D Morrissey; Darby A Houck; Esther Jang; Eric C McCarty; Jonathan T Bravman; Adam J Seidl; Michelle L Wolcott; Armando F Vidal; Rachel M Frank Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2020-04-24
Authors: Carlos Maia Dias; Sérgio B Gonçalves; António Completo; Martina Tognini; Manuel Ribeiro da Silva; Jorge Mineiro; Francisco Curate; Frederico Ferreira; João Folgado Journal: J Exp Orthop Date: 2021-02-03