Literature DB >> 21684053

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a biomechanical comparison of the suture-bridge technique vs. a new transosseous technique using SutureButtons(®).

Mark Tauber1, Thomas Hoffelner, Rainer Penzkofer, Heiko Koller, Juliane Zenner, Wolfgang Hitzl, Philipp Moroder, Herbert Resch.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The suture-bridge technique using anchors as established transosseous-equivalent technique in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was compared to a modified transosseous technique suitable for arthroscopic cuff repair.
METHODS: In 10 fresh-frozen matched pairs of human cadaveric shoulders (mean age 67.1, SD 8.5 years), two different surgical techniques of cuff repair were tested: Group 1, using the suture-bridge technique with suture anchors, and Group 2, using two transosseous tunnels with SutureButtons(®). Lateral row fixation was performed in both groups using knotless implants. Cyclic displacement to gap formation of 2 and 5mm, linear stiffness, yield load, ultimate load, and mode of failure were recorded.
FINDINGS: Gap formation at the tendon-to-bone interface of 2mm occurred after a mean of 219.5 (SD 590.7) cycles in Group 1 and after 750.0 (SD 1566.1) cycles in Group 2. Gap formation of 5mm occurred after 2331.6 (SD 2033.9) cycles (Group 1) and 2364.5 (SD 1994.2) cycles (Group 2), respectively. The yield and ultimate loads were 316.9 (SD 114.1)N and 375.9 (SD 131.2)N in Group 1, and 311.0 (SD 97.2)N and 363.8 (SD 107.6)N in Group 2, respectively. The linear stiffness was 40.3 (SD 10.4)N/mm in Group 1, and 41.6 (SD 13.2)N/mm in Group 2. There were no statistically significant intergroup differences.
INTERPRETATION: The new transosseous technique using SutureButtons(®) achieves equivalent biomechanical properties to the established suture-bridge technique using anchors. A tendentially reduced primary gap formation may be of importance for repair healing during the early phase of rehabilitation.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21684053     DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2011.05.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)        ISSN: 0268-0033            Impact factor:   2.063


  6 in total

1.  Letter to the editor: Advantages of arthroscopic transosseous suture repair of the rotator cuff without the use of anchors.

Authors:  Goran Bicanic; Nikola Cicak; Denis Trsek; Hrvoje Klobucar
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-12-21       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair: technical note, outcomes, and complications.

Authors:  Eric M Black; Albert Lin; Uma Srikumaran; Nitin Jain; Michael T Freehill
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.390

3.  History of rotator cuff surgery.

Authors:  Pietro Randelli; Davide Cucchi; Vincenza Ragone; Laura de Girolamo; Paolo Cabitza; Mario Randelli
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Anchorless Arthroscopic Transosseous and Anchored Arthroscopic Transosseous Equivalent Rotator Cuff Repair Show No Differences in Structural Integrity or Patient-reported Outcomes in a Matched Cohort.

Authors:  Uma Srikumaran; Eric G Huish; Brendan Y Shi; Casey V Hannan; Iman Ali; Kelly G Kilcoyne
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  Reusing cadaveric humeri for fracture testing after testing simulated rotator cuff tendon repairs.

Authors:  John G Skedros; Todd C Pitts; Alex N Knight; Wayne Z Burkhead
Journal:  Biores Open Access       Date:  2014-10-01

6.  Comparison of Occurrence of Bone Tunnel Laceration, Clinical Results, and Cuff Repair Integrity of Transosseous Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair With and Without Lateral Cortical Augmentation.

Authors:  Yoshihiro Hirakawa; Tomoya Manaka; Yoichi Ito; Yoshinobu Matsuda; Katsumasa Nakazawa; Ryosuke Iio; Hiroaki Nakamura
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-06-14
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.