Abstract
BackgroundThe suture bridge (SB) technique and conventional double-row (DR) are both effective in repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears . However, increasing numbers of scholars believe that the SB technique produces better results than conventional DR because of the higher bone-tendon contact area and pressure. However, The clinical outcomes have been mixed and little direct evidence has been supplied in vivo. This study was designed using the SB and DR techniques to determine which is the better technique.MethodsSixty-four New Zealand white rabbits were randomly divided into 2 groups, the SB group and DR group. SB and DR were then used to repair their rotator cuff tears. Rabbits were then sacrificed at the 2nd, 4th, or 8th week after surgery and a histological comparison was made. The biomechanical comparison was made at the 8th week.ResultsThe load to failure of the SB group was 134.59 ± 17.69 N at the 8th postoperative week, and that was significantly higher than in the DR group (103.83 ± 6.62, P = 0.001), but both repair groups remained lower than in the control group (199.25 ± 14.81). Histological evaluation showed that both the SB and DR groups healed at the bone-tendon interface. But there were subtle differences between the two groups in the structure and morphology of collagen fibers and cartilage cells at bone-tendon interface. In general, the collagen fibers of the SB group were more compact than those of the DR group at all times tested. At the 4th and 8th weeks, the collagen fibers and cartilage cells in the SB group were arranged in a column modality, but those in the DR group were distributed horizontally.ConclusionThe SB technique facilitated healing more effectively than the conventional DR technique. The difference in morphology of collagen fibers and cartilage cells may be related to the difference in bone-tendon contact pressure.
Highlights
The suture bridge (SB) technique and conventional double-row (DR) are both effective in repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears
The loads to failure were lower in the DR group and SB group than in the control group, and this difference was statistically significant
This was consistent with the present findings and could explain why the SB group had better healing than the DR group but significantly less load to fail than control group at the 8th week
Summary
The suture bridge (SB) technique and conventional double-row (DR) are both effective in repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Increasing numbers of scholars believe that the SB technique produces better results than conventional DR because of the higher bone-tendon contact area and pressure. The clinical outcomes have been mixed and little direct evidence has been supplied in vivo. This study was designed using the SB and DR techniques to determine which is the better technique. Rotator cuff tears are common disease of the shoulder among the elderly. Studies have shown that a fullthickness rotator cuff tear does not heal to the original muscle strength and the strength declines during long term follow-up [1]. There are many ways of repairing full-thickness rotator cuff tears.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
