Three Medial All Suture Anchors Improves Contact Force Compared to Two Hard Body Anchors in a Biomechanical Two-Tendon Rotator Cuff Tear Model

PURPOSE: To biomechanically compare a knotless double-row construct with 3 medial all-suture (3AS) anchors with a standard 2 medial hard body (2HB) anchor construct. METHODS: Twelve matched cadaveric shoulder specimens with a mean age of 57 years (range: 54-61 years) were randomized to receive a knotless double-row repair with either a 3AS or 2HB construct. In the 3AS construct, three 2.6-mm all-suture anchors were placed adjacent to the articular margin and secured laterally with two 4.75-mm knotless hard body anchors. In the 2HB construct, two 4.75-mm medial hard body anchors were placed medially, lateral fixation was identical to the 3AS construct. Creep, displacement, stiffness, and ultimate load were recorded for each sample. In addition, a SynDaver model was used to compare contact pressure between the 2 repair constructs. RESULTS: There were no differences in cyclic displacement at 1, 30, and 100 cycles (P = .616, .497, .190, respectively), cyclic stiffness (.928), ultimate load (.445), or load to failure (P = .445) between the 2 constructs. The 3AS repair construct had improved contact pressure between tendon and bone when compared with the 2HB construct at loads of 20 N, 30 N, and 40 N (P = .01, .02, and .04, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Displacement and load to failure properties are similar between knotless constructs using either 2HB or 3AS for the medial row. However, contact force may improve with the use of 3 medial all-suture anchors. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As all-suture anchors are smaller in size when compared with hard body anchors. For this reason, there is potential to place an additional all-suture medial anchor to improve contact force and potentially improve rotator cuff healing when compared with the use of hard body anchors.