Xiaoxi Ji1, Qingshan Chen2, Andrew R Thoreson2, Jin Qu2, Kai-Nan An2, Peter C Amadio2, Scott P Steinmann3, Chunfeng Zhao4. 1. Biomechanics Laboratory, Division of Orthopedic Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA; Trauma Center, Shanghai First People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200080, China. 2. Biomechanics Laboratory, Division of Orthopedic Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. 4. Biomechanics Laboratory, Division of Orthopedic Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. Electronic address: zhaoc@mayo.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the mechanical performance of a rotator cuff repaired with a novel tendon-fibrocartilage-bone composite bridging patch vs the traditional Mason-Allen repair in an in vitro canine model. METHODS: Twenty shoulders and 10 bridging patches from patellar tendon were harvested. The patches were trimmed and sliced into 2 layers. An infraspinatus tendon tear was created in each shoulder. Modified Mason-Allen sutures were used to repair the infraspinatus tendon to the greater tuberosity, with or without the bridging patch (bridging patch group and controls, respectively). Shoulders were loaded to failure under displacement control at a rate of 0.5mm/s. FINDINGS: The ultimate tensile load was significantly higher in the bridging patch group than control (mean [SD], 365.46 [36.45] vs 272.79 [48.88] N; P<.001). Stiffness at the greater tuberosity repair site and the patch-infraspinatus tendon repair site was significantly higher than the control repair site (93.96 [27.72] vs 42.62 [17.48] N/mm P<.001; 65.94 [24.51] vs 42.62 [17.48] N/mm P=.02, respectively). INTERPRETATION: The tendon-fibrocartilage-bone composite bridging patch achieved higher ultimate tensile load and stiffness at the patch-greater tuberosity repair site compared with traditional repair in a canine model. This composite tissue transforms the traditional tendon-to-bone healing interface (with dissimilar tissues) into a pair of bone-to-bone and tendon-to-tendon interfaces, which may improve healing quality and reduce retear rate.
BACKGROUND: To compare the mechanical performance of a rotator cuff repaired with a novel tendon-fibrocartilage-bone composite bridging patch vs the traditional Mason-Allen repair in an in vitro canine model. METHODS: Twenty shoulders and 10 bridging patches from patellar tendon were harvested. The patches were trimmed and sliced into 2 layers. An infraspinatus tendon tear was created in each shoulder. Modified Mason-Allen sutures were used to repair the infraspinatus tendon to the greater tuberosity, with or without the bridging patch (bridging patch group and controls, respectively). Shoulders were loaded to failure under displacement control at a rate of 0.5mm/s. FINDINGS: The ultimate tensile load was significantly higher in the bridging patch group than control (mean [SD], 365.46 [36.45] vs 272.79 [48.88] N; P<.001). Stiffness at the greater tuberosity repair site and the patch-infraspinatus tendon repair site was significantly higher than the control repair site (93.96 [27.72] vs 42.62 [17.48] N/mm P<.001; 65.94 [24.51] vs 42.62 [17.48] N/mm P=.02, respectively). INTERPRETATION: The tendon-fibrocartilage-bone composite bridging patch achieved higher ultimate tensile load and stiffness at the patch-greater tuberosity repair site compared with traditional repair in a canine model. This composite tissue transforms the traditional tendon-to-bone healing interface (with dissimilar tissues) into a pair of bone-to-bone and tendon-to-tendon interfaces, which may improve healing quality and reduce retear rate.
Authors: Leesa M Galatz; Craig M Ball; Sharlene A Teefey; William D Middleton; Ken Yamaguchi Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Michael Khazzam; John E Kuhn; Ed Mulligan; Joseph A Abboud; Keith M Baumgarten; Robert H Brophy; Grant L Jones; Bruce Miller; Matthew Smith; Rick W Wright Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2012-06-15 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Tomás G Guerrero; Mariano A Makara; Kristine Katiofsky; Mark A Fluckiger; Joe P Morgan; Michael Haessig; Pierre M Montavon Journal: Vet Surg Date: 2010-12-23 Impact factor: 1.495
Authors: Peter Reilly; Anthony M J Bull; Andrew A Amis; Andrew L Wallace; Andrew Richards; Adam M Hill; Roger J H Emery Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2004 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Benjamin B Rothrauff; Thierry Pauyo; Richard E Debski; Mark W Rodosky; Rocky S Tuan; Volker Musahl Journal: Tissue Eng Part B Rev Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 6.389
Authors: Solaiman Tarafder; John A Brito; Sumeet Minhas; Linda Effiong; Stavros Thomopoulos; Chang H Lee Journal: Biofabrication Date: 2019-11-18 Impact factor: 9.954
Authors: Elisabeth A Lemmon; Ryan C Locke; Adrianna K Szostek; Elahe Ganji; Megan L Killian Journal: Connect Tissue Res Date: 2018-07-02 Impact factor: 3.417
Authors: Zhanwen Wang; Hong Li; Zeling Long; Subin Lin; Andrew R Thoreson; Steven L Moran; Anne Gingery; Peter C Amadio; Scott P Steinmann; Chunfeng Zhao Journal: Bone Joint Res Date: 2020-07-23 Impact factor: 5.853
Authors: Zhanwen Wang; Zeling Long; Peter C Amadio; Anne Gingery; Steven L Moran; Scott P Steinmann; Chunfeng Zhao Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2020-09-02