Biomechanical evaluation of a single-row versus double-row repair for complete subscapularis tears.
The purpose of the study was to compare a single-row repair and a double-row repair technique for the specific characteristics of a complete subscapularis lesion. Ten pairs of human cadaveric shoulder human shoulder specimens were tested for stiffness and ultimate tensile strength of the intact tendons in a load to failure protocol. After a complete subscapularis tear was provoked, the specimens were assigned to two treatment groups: single-row repair (1) and a double-row repair using a "suture bridge" technique (2). After repair cyclic loading a subsequent load to failure protocol was performed to determine the ultimate tensile load, the stiffness and the elongation behaviour of the reconstructions. The intact subscapularis tendons had a mean stiffness of 115 N/mm and a mean ultimate load of 720 N. The predominant failure mode of the intact tendons was a tear at the humeral insertion site (65%). The double-row technique restored 48% of the ultimate load of the intact tendons (332 N), while the single-row technique revealed a significantly lower ultimate load of 244 N (P = 0.001). In terms of the stiffness, the double-row technique showed a mean stiffness of 81 N/mm which is significantly higher compared to the stiffness of the single-row repairs of 55 N/mm (P = 0.001). The double-row technique has been shown to be stronger and stiffer when compared to a conventional single-row repair. Therefore, this technique is recommended from a biomechanical point of view irrespectively if performed by an open or arthroscopic approach.
Wellmann
Mathias
M
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Anna von Borries Str. 1-6, 30625 Hannover, Germany. wellmann.mathias@web.de
Wiebringhaus
Philipp
P
Lodde
Ina
I
Waizy
Hazibullah
H
Becher
Christoph
C
Raschke
Michael J
MJ
Petersen
Wolf
W
D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D002102:Cadaver; D006801:Humans; D018482:Muscle, Skeletal / Q000293:injuries / Q000601:surgery*; D000070599:Shoulder Injuries; D053441:Suture Anchors; D013536:Suture Techniques; D013708:Tendon Injuries / Q000601:surgery*; D013718:Tensile Strength
Arthroscopy. 2003 Mar;19(3):330-3
12627162
Arthroscopy. 2007 Mar;23(3):251-4
17349466
Arthroscopy. 2002 Feb;18(2):124-35
11830805
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988 Oct;70(9):1308-11
3182884
Am J Sports Med. 2006 Mar;34(3):407-14
16282581
Arthroscopy. 2006 Sep;22(9):1014-27
16952733
Arthroscopy. 1997 Apr;13(2):172-6
9127074
Am J Sports Med. 2008 Aug;36(8):1504-10
18296541
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Feb;88(2):309-16
16452742
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007 May-Jun;16(3 Suppl):S59-64
17169589
Arthroscopy. 2005 Oct;21(10):1223-8
16226651
Arthroscopy. 2008 Aug;24(8):941-8
18657744
Am J Sports Med. 2008 May;36(5):893-900
18272799
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Nov;88(11):2425-31
17079400
Arthroscopy. 2006 Dec;22(12):1360.e1-5
17157738
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Nov;89(11):2378-88
17974879
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007 Jul-Aug;16(4):469-76
17321158
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Aug;89(8):1763-9
17671016
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007 Jul-Aug;16(4):461-8
17321161
Arthroscopy. 2003 Dec;19(10):1142-50
14673459
Arthroscopy. 2006 Sep;22(9):937-40
16952721
Am J Sports Med. 1997 Jan-Feb;25(1):13-22
9006686
Arthroscopy. 2006 Jun;22(6):609.e1
16762697
Arthroscopy. 2007 Jun;23(6):662-9
17560482
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008 Jan-Feb;17(1):156-61
17931907
J Orthop Res. 2000 Sep;18(5):829-34
11117307
Am J Sports Med. 2007 Aug;35(8):1247-53
17452513
Arthroscopy. 2003 Feb;19(2):131-43
12579145
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Apr;87(4):725-30
15805199
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Feb;88(2):403-10
16452754
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Jun;89(6):1184-93
17545420
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996 Jul;78(7):1015-23
8698718
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Nov;85(11):2190-8
14630852