The primary stability of arthroscopic subscapularis tendon repair depends on the suture technique: a biomechanical evaluation of 4 different repair techniques
Background: Numerous single- and double-row repair techniques with simple and modified stitches have been described for subscapularis tendon tears. - Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aimed to uniformly evaluate the influence of 4 different repair techniques on the biomechanical performance of fixation...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article (Journal) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Apr 2025
|
| In: |
Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine
Year: 2025, Volume: 13, Issue: 4, Pages: 1-9 |
| ISSN: | 2325-9671 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/23259671241302069 |
| Online Access: | Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241302069
|
| Author Notes: | Julia A. Nacov, MD, Sandra Kammerlohr, MD, Manfred Staat, PhD, Eduard Buess, MD, Tim Leschinger, MD, Kilian Wegmann, MD, Lars P. Müller, MD, PhD, and Michael Hackl, MD |
| Summary: | Background: Numerous single- and double-row repair techniques with simple and modified stitches have been described for subscapularis tendon tears. - Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aimed to uniformly evaluate the influence of 4 different repair techniques on the biomechanical performance of fixation for full-thickness subscapularis tendon tears. It was hypothesized that (1) the 2 modified single-row repair techniques would require more cycles to result in 3- and 5-mm gap formation and have a higher load to failure after cyclic loading than the simple single-row repair technique and (2) the double-row repair technique would also require more cycles to result in 3- and 5-mm gap formation and have a significantly higher load to failure after cyclic loading compared to the simple single-row repair technique. - Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. - Methods: Full-thickness subscapularis tendon tears were created in 32 fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders, and the tears were treated in 1 of 4 ways: (1) single-row repair with the mattress stitch, (2) single-row repair with the modified lasso-loop stitch, (3) single-row repair with the modified Mason-Allen stitch, or (4) double-row repair. After repair, specimens were progressively cyclically loaded to 200 N, and the number of cycles to obtain a 3- and 5-mm gap was recorded. After cyclic loading, the specimens were loaded to failure at 500 mm/min, and ultimate failure loads were measured. - Results: There were no significant differences between either of the modified single-row repair techniques and the simple single-row repair technique. Double-row repair withstood significantly more cycles until 3-mm (P < .001) and 5-mm (P = .004) gap formation and had a higher ultimate failure load (P = .015) compared to the simple single-row repair technique, and double-row repair withstood more cycles until 3-mm gap formation (P = .003) compared with single-row repair with the modified lasso-loop stitch. No significant differences were found between double-row repair and single-row repair with the modified Mason-Allen stitch. - Conclusion: Findings indicated that (1) there was no significant biomechanical advantage of the modified single-row repair techniques over the simple single-row repair technique and (2) while the double-row repair technique was biomechanically superior to the simple single-row repair technique, there was no significant difference between single-row repair with the modified Mason-Allen stitch and double-row repair. - Clinical Relevance: Considering that double-row repair might not be useful in some tears because of the risk of overtensioning, modified single-row repair techniques appear to be an adequate refixation alternative. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Erstmals veröffentlicht: 14. April 2025 Gesehen am 23.06.2025 |
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 2325-9671 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/23259671241302069 |