Cargando…
Biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair
BACKGROUND: Numerous biomechanical and clinical studies comparing different techniques for rotator cuff repair have been reported, yet universal consensus regarding the superior technique has not achieved. A medially-based single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor (also referred to as the Southern...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7517672/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32972397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03654-y |
_version_ | 1783587270709739520 |
---|---|
author | He, He-Bei Hu, Yong Li, Chuan Li, Cheng-Guo Wang, Min-Cong Zhu, Hui-Feng Yan, Zhi-Wen Pan, Cheng-Long Wang, Tao |
author_facet | He, He-Bei Hu, Yong Li, Chuan Li, Cheng-Guo Wang, Min-Cong Zhu, Hui-Feng Yan, Zhi-Wen Pan, Cheng-Long Wang, Tao |
author_sort | He, He-Bei |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Numerous biomechanical and clinical studies comparing different techniques for rotator cuff repair have been reported, yet universal consensus regarding the superior technique has not achieved. A medially-based single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor (also referred to as the Southern California Orthopedic Institute [SCOI] row) and a suture-bridge double-row (SB-DR) with Push-Locks have been shown to result in comparable improvement in treating rotator cuff tear, yet the biomechanical difference is unknown. The purpose of the current study was to determine whether a SCOI row repair had comparable initial biomechanical properties to a SB-DR repair. METHODS: Six matched pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders with full-thickness supraspinatus tendon tears we created were included. Two different repairs were performed for each pair (SCOI row and SB-DR methods). Specimens were mounted on a material testing machine to undergo cyclic loading, which was cycled from 10 to 100 N at 1 Hz for 500 cycles. Construct gap formation was recorded at an interval of 50 cycles. Samples were then loaded to failure and modes of failure were recorded. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and pair-t test were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The construct gap formation did not differ between SCOI row and SB-DR repairs (P = 0.056). The last gap displacement was 1.93 ± 0.37 mm for SCOI row repair, and 1.49 ± 0.55 mm for SB-DR repair. The tensile load for 5 mm of elongation and ultimate failure were higher for SCOI row repair compared to SB-DR repair (P = 0.011 and 0.028, respectively). The ultimate failure load was 326.34 ± 11.52 N in the SCOI row group, and 299.82 ± 27.27 N in the SB-DR group. Rotator cuff repair with the SCOI row method failed primarily at the suture- tendon interface, whereas pullout of the lateral row anchors was the primary mechanism of failure for repair with the SB-DR method. CONCLUSION: Rotator cuff repair with the SCOI row method has superior biomechanical properties when compared with the SB-DR method. Therefore, SCOI row repair using a medially-based single-row technique with triple-loaded suture anchor is recommended to improve the initial strength in treating full-thickness rotator cuff tears. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7517672 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75176722020-09-25 Biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair He, He-Bei Hu, Yong Li, Chuan Li, Cheng-Guo Wang, Min-Cong Zhu, Hui-Feng Yan, Zhi-Wen Pan, Cheng-Long Wang, Tao BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Numerous biomechanical and clinical studies comparing different techniques for rotator cuff repair have been reported, yet universal consensus regarding the superior technique has not achieved. A medially-based single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor (also referred to as the Southern California Orthopedic Institute [SCOI] row) and a suture-bridge double-row (SB-DR) with Push-Locks have been shown to result in comparable improvement in treating rotator cuff tear, yet the biomechanical difference is unknown. The purpose of the current study was to determine whether a SCOI row repair had comparable initial biomechanical properties to a SB-DR repair. METHODS: Six matched pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders with full-thickness supraspinatus tendon tears we created were included. Two different repairs were performed for each pair (SCOI row and SB-DR methods). Specimens were mounted on a material testing machine to undergo cyclic loading, which was cycled from 10 to 100 N at 1 Hz for 500 cycles. Construct gap formation was recorded at an interval of 50 cycles. Samples were then loaded to failure and modes of failure were recorded. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and pair-t test were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The construct gap formation did not differ between SCOI row and SB-DR repairs (P = 0.056). The last gap displacement was 1.93 ± 0.37 mm for SCOI row repair, and 1.49 ± 0.55 mm for SB-DR repair. The tensile load for 5 mm of elongation and ultimate failure were higher for SCOI row repair compared to SB-DR repair (P = 0.011 and 0.028, respectively). The ultimate failure load was 326.34 ± 11.52 N in the SCOI row group, and 299.82 ± 27.27 N in the SB-DR group. Rotator cuff repair with the SCOI row method failed primarily at the suture- tendon interface, whereas pullout of the lateral row anchors was the primary mechanism of failure for repair with the SB-DR method. CONCLUSION: Rotator cuff repair with the SCOI row method has superior biomechanical properties when compared with the SB-DR method. Therefore, SCOI row repair using a medially-based single-row technique with triple-loaded suture anchor is recommended to improve the initial strength in treating full-thickness rotator cuff tears. BioMed Central 2020-09-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7517672/ /pubmed/32972397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03654-y Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article He, He-Bei Hu, Yong Li, Chuan Li, Cheng-Guo Wang, Min-Cong Zhu, Hui-Feng Yan, Zhi-Wen Pan, Cheng-Long Wang, Tao Biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair |
title | Biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair |
title_full | Biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair |
title_fullStr | Biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair |
title_full_unstemmed | Biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair |
title_short | Biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair |
title_sort | biomechanical comparison between single-row with triple-loaded suture anchor and suture-bridge double-row rotator cuff repair |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7517672/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32972397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03654-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hehebei biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair AT huyong biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair AT lichuan biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair AT lichengguo biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair AT wangmincong biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair AT zhuhuifeng biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair AT yanzhiwen biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair AT panchenglong biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair AT wangtao biomechanicalcomparisonbetweensinglerowwithtripleloadedsutureanchorandsuturebridgedoublerowrotatorcuffrepair |