| HOME | HELP | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
|
|
|||||||
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Center for Shoulder, Elbow, and Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Columbia University, New York, New York
* Address correspondence to Christopher S. Ahmad, MD, Center for Shoulder, Elbow, and Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 622 West 168th Street, PH-11th Floor, New York, NY 10032 (e-mail: CSA{at}columbia.edu).
Background: Interface contact pressure between the tendon and bone has been shown to influence healing. This study evaluates the interface pressure of the rotator cuff tendon to the greater tuberosity for different rotator cuff repair techniques.
Hypothesis: The transosseous tunnel rotator cuff repair technique provides larger pressure distributions over a defined insertion footprint than do suture anchor techniques.
Study Design: Controlled laboratory study.
Methods: Simulated rotator cuff tears over a 1 x 2-cm infraspinatus insertion footprint were created in 25 bovine shoulders. A transosseous tunnel simple suture technique (n = 8), suture anchor simple technique (n = 9), and suture anchor mattress technique (n = 8) were used for repair. Pressurized contact areas and mean pressures of the repaired tendon against the tuberosity were determined using pressure-sensitive film placed between the tendon and the tuberosity.
Results: The mean contact area between the tendon and tuberosity insertion footprint was significantly greater for the transosseous technique (67.7 ± 5.8 mm2) compared with the suture anchor simple (34.1 ± 9.4 mm2) and suture anchor mattress (26.0 ± 5.3 mm2) techniques (P < .05). The mean interface pressure exerted over the footprint by the tendon was also greater for the transosseous technique (0.32 ± 0.05 MPa) compared with the suture anchor simple (0.26 ± 0.04 MPa) and suture anchor mattress (0.24 ± 0.02 MPa) techniques (P < .05).
Conclusion: The transosseous tunnel rotator cuff repair technique creates significantly more contact and greater overall pressure distribution over a defined footprint when compared with suture anchor techniques.
Clinical Relevance: Stronger and faster rotator cuff healing may be expected when beneficial pressure distributions exist between the repaired rotator cuff and its insertion footprint. Tendon-to-tuberosity pressure and contact characteristics should be considered in the development of improved open and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair techniques.
Key Words: rotator cuff • footprint • transosseous • suture anchor • pressure
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  K. Morse, A. D. Davis, R. Afra, E. K. Kaye, A. Schepsis, and I. Voloshin Arthroscopic Versus Mini-open Rotator Cuff Repair: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-analysis Am. J. Sports Med., September 1, 2008; 36(9): 1824 - 1828. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. B. Frank, N. S. ElAttrache, J. S. Dines, A. Blackburn, J. Crues, and J. E. Tibone Repair Site Integrity After Arthroscopic Transosseous-Equivalent Suture-Bridge Rotator Cuff Repair Am. J. Sports Med., August 1, 2008; 36(8): 1496 - 1503. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
O. Lorbach, F. Bachelier, J. Vees, D. Kohn, and D. Pape Cyclic Loading of Rotator Cuff Reconstructions: Single-Row Repair With Modified Suture Configurations Versus Double-Row Repair Am. J. Sports Med., August 1, 2008; 36(8): 1504 - 1510. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. C. Park, J. A. Idjadi, N. S. ElAttrache, J. E. Tibone, M. H. McGarry, and T. Q. Lee The Effect of Dynamic External Rotation Comparing 2 Footprint-Restoring Rotator Cuff Repair Techniques Am. J. Sports Med., May 1, 2008; 36(5): 893 - 900. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. S. Ahmad, C. Kleweno, A. M. Jacir, J. E. Bell, T. R. Gardner, W. N. Levine, and L. U. Bigliani Biomechanical Performance of Rotator Cuff Repairs With Humeral Rotation: A New Rotator Cuff Repair Failure Model Am. J. Sports Med., May 1, 2008; 36(5): 888 - 892. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. C. Park, B. J. Jun, C. J. Park, C. S. Ahmad, N. S. ElAttrache, and T. Q. Lee The Biomechanical Effects of Dynamic External Rotation on Rotator Cuff Repair Compared to Testing With the Humerus Fixed Am. J. Sports Med., November 1, 2007; 35(11): 1931 - 1939. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Reider After the Honeymoon Am. J. Sports Med., August 1, 2007; 35(8): 1245 - 1246. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. C. Park, Y. Tuoheti, and E. Itoi Letter to the Editor * Authors' Response Am. J. Sports Med., July 1, 2007; 35(7): 1210 - 1210. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. J. Rubino III and M. D. Miller What's New in Sports Medicine J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., February 1, 2006; 88(2): 457 - 468. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. M. Gartsman and S. S. Hasan What's New in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., January 1, 2006; 88(1): 230 - 243. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
