title: Comparison of repair integrity and functional outcomes for 3 arthroscopic suture bridge rotator cuff repair techniques.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  No reported study has compared the clinical outcomes of suture bridge techniques.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To compare the functional outcomes and repair integrity of the arthroscopic single-mattress (SM), double-pulley (DP), and double-mattress (DM) suture bridge (SB) techniques for full-thickness rotator cuff tears.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.
  
  
  METHODS
  Seventy-eight consecutive shoulders with full-thickness rotator cuff tears and a 1- to 4-cm anteroposterior dimension underwent arthroscopic SB repairs. The SM-SB technique was used in the first 26 consecutive shoulders, the DP-SB method was used in the second 26 consecutive shoulders, and the DM-SB repair was used in the final 26 consecutive shoulders. Seventy-four shoulders (94.9%) underwent postoperative evaluation for cuff integrity using MRI or ultrasound. Clinical outcomes were evaluated in 76 shoulders (97.4%) at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the shoulder rating scale of the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Constant scores at an average of 31 months postoperatively.
  
  
  RESULTS
  At final follow-up, the average ASES, UCLA, and Constant scores improved significantly: respective scores were 88.46, 30.58, and 73.96 in the SM-SB group (P < .001); 87.19, 31.35, and 72.50 in the DP-SB group (P < .001); and 87.19, 32.81, and 75.35 in the DM-SB group (P < .001). However, there were no significant differences among the 3 groups in terms of the ASES, UCLA, or Constant scores (P = .954, .210, and .755, respectively). The retear rate of repaired rotator cuffs was 20% in the SM-SB group, 12.5% in the DP-SB group, and 12% in the DM-SB group; however, the differences among the 3 groups were not statistically significant (P = .674). The number of suture anchors (mean ± SD) used for repair was 4.31 ± 0.47 in the SM-SB group, 4.00 ± 0.00 in the DP-SB group, and 3.38 ± 0.50 in the DM-SB group (P < .001).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair yielded successful functional outcomes without significant differences among the 3 SB techniques. Additionally, no significant differences in repair integrity were observed among the 3 methods postoperatively.
authors.affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, 640 Daesa-Dong, Jung-Gu, Daejeon 301-721, South Korea. kckim@cnu.ac.kr
authors.forename: Kyung Cheon
authors.initials: KC
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Hyun Dae
authors.initials: HD
authors.lastname: Shin
authors.forename: Soo Min
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Cha
authors.forename: Woo Yong
authors.initials: WY
authors.lastname: Lee
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001182:Arthroscopy; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011446:Prospective Studies; D017006:Rotator Cuff / Q000601:surgery*; D000070636:Rotator Cuff Injuries; D013536:Suture Techniques; D013708:Tendon Injuries / Q000601:surgery*