Double-row Group Research Articles

Comparing Conventional Double-Row With Transosseous Equivalent Suture Bridge Fixation in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repairs: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

Biomechanical studies have shown that the transosseous equivalent suture bridge (TOE-SB) rotator cuff repair technique improves contact areas and pressure between the tendon and footprint, which may facilitate healing. However, few studies have directly compared its outcomes with traditional double-row (DR) repair. The primary objectives of this study were to (1) compare the functional outcomes of DR with TOE-SB fixation in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs and (2) compare healing rates between the 2 groups and investigate whether any factors were associated with healing. It was hypothesized that arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using DR repair would demonstrate no difference in disease-specific quality of life, patient-reported outcomes, or healing rates compared with TOE-SB repair. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. This was a cohort study conducted as a subanalysis of 2 larger randomized controlled trials. Patients ≥18 years old with degenerative rotator cuff tears confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging who had persistent symptoms of pain and functional impairment after 6 months of nonoperative management were enrolled in prospective randomized controlled trials and underwent either a traditional DR repair or a TOE-SB rotator cuff repair. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and the Constant score at baseline and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Healing rates were determined using ultrasound at 24 months postoperatively. A total of 184 patients were included in this study; 34 patients underwent conventional DR repair and 150 underwent TOE-SB repair. Postoperative changes in the outcome measures from baseline were statistically significant for all outcomes in both groups (P < .0001). No statistically significant differences were found between outcomes at any of the follow-up times, except a significant difference in the Constant score at 24 months in favor of the DR group (mean ± SE, 80.5 ± 1.1 [95% CI, 78.4-82.7]) and TOE-SB and DR, respectively (mean ± SE, 85.7 ± 2.2 [95% CI, 81.2-90.1]) (P = .041). Healing rates were 77.8% for DR and 83% for TOE-SB (odds ratio, 1.34 [95% CI, 0.53-3.38]; P = .53). Multivariable regression analysis showed a positive correlation between nonhealing rates and the rotator cuff tear size in the sagittal plane (odds ratio, 1.97 (95% CI, 1.02-3.78); P = .042). No difference was found between DR and TOE-SB rotator cuff repair in the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Constant strength subscore, or the healing rate. The Constant score at the 24-month follow-up favored DR repair but did not reach the minimal clinically important difference. An association was found between higher healing rates and smaller sagittal plane tear sizes.

The New Double-row Bankart Repair Recovered Shoulder Stability without Excessive Motion Limitation: A Case-Control Study with Single-row Bankart Repair.

Bankart lesion is one of the most common lesions of the glenohumeral joint. Several double-row suture methods were reported for Bankart repair, which could provide more stability, yet more motion limitation and complications. Therefore, we introduced a new double-row Bankart repair technique, key point double-row suture which used one anchor in the medial line. The purpose of this article is to investigate the clinical outcomes of this new method and to compare it with single-row suture. Seventy-eight patients receiving key point double-row suture or single-row suture from October 2010 to June 2014 were collected retrospectively. The basic information including gender, age, dominant arm, and number of episodes of instability was collected. Before surgery, the glenoid bone loss was measured from the CT scan. The visual analogue scale, American shoulder and elbow surgeons, the University of California at Los Angeles shoulder scale, and subjective shoulder value were valued before surgery and at the last follow-up. Forty-four patients (24 patients receiving single-row suture and 20 patients receiving key point double-row suture) were followed up successfully. The follow-up period was 9.2 ± 1.1 years (range, 7.8-11.4 years). At the last follow-up, no significant differences were detected for any of the clinical scores. The recurrence rate was 12.5% for the single-row group and 10% for the double-row group, respectively (p = 0.795) 14 patients (31.8%) in the single-row group and nine patients (26.5%) in the double-row group were tested for active range of motion. A statistically significant difference was found only for the internal rotation at 90° abduction (48.9° for single-row and 76.7° for key point double-row, p = 0.033). The key point double-row sutures for Bankart lesions could achieve similar long-term outcomes compared with single-row suture, and one medial anchor did not result in a limited range of motion. The low recurrence rate and previous biomechanical results also indicate the key point double-row suture is a reliable method.

Aerodynamic loads on groups of offshore wind turbine towers stored on quaysides during the pre-assembly phase

Offshore wind turbine towers are pre-assembled and temporarily held in close proximity to each other in group arrangements on port quaysides during which time they are highly sensitive to wind action. Accurate estimates of the aerodynamic loads on the individual towers and on the overall group are therefore essential for the safe and economic design of the quayside’s supporting structures and foundations. Given the many possible group configurations, the key role played by wind direction and the limited literature on this topic, wind tunnel tests represent the main way to address this issue. The problem is that such tests tend to lead to overconservative designs due to inevitable mismatches in the Reynolds number, which is typically subcritical in experiments and transcritical at full scale. This crucial issue is dealt with here using an original engineering solution based on concentrated but discontinuous surface roughness, which allows the satisfactory simulation of the mean loads occurring at high Reynolds number. This case study assumes slender wind turbine towers with a height of 115 m, and for the sake of generality, the investigations focus principally on a cylindrical shape rather than the more complex real-world geometry. The constant diameter of the towers is determined based on the theoretical equivalence of the mean overturning moment. The rationality of this procedure is verified a posteriori using a set of measurements on the real-shape towers. The experiments show a regular behavior of the maximum mean base shear force and moment for towers arranged in double-row groups, while the results are more complicated for the heavily loaded single-row groups; indeed, despite the simulated transcritical regime and the turbulent wind profile, biased flow sometimes occurs in symmetric or nearly-symmetric configurations. Dynamic loads are also inspected, and gust factors in good agreement with Eurocode 1 prescriptions are found. Several parametric studies are carried out, the most extensive of which is devoted to assessing the role of tower height. A complicated non-monotonic pattern of the load coefficients with the tower height is encountered; therefore, the use of simple correction coefficients for practical design purposes must be handled with care. Moreover, the analysis reveals end-effect factors non-negligibly higher than those suggested by Eurocode 1 and ESDU 80025.

Effectiveness analysis of arthroscopic single/double-row suture techniques in repairing of moderate rotator cuff tears

To compare the early effectiveness of arthroscopic repair of moderate rotator cuff tears with single-row modified Mason-Allen technique and double-row suture bridge technique. The clinical data of 40 patients with moderate rotator cuff tears who met the selection criteria between January 2021 and May 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 20 cases were repaired with single-row modified Mason-Allen suture technique (single-row group) and 20 cases with double-row suture bridge technique (double-row group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease duration, rotator cuff tear size, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Constant-Murley score, and T2* value between the two groups ( P>0.05). The VAS score, Constant-Murley score (including subjective influence, pain, flexion, internal rotation, external rotation, abduction, and muscle strength score) were compared between the two groups before operation and at 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months after operation. Functional MRI and ultrashort-echo-time (UTE)-T2* technique were performed to calculate T2* value and quantitatively evaluate the healing of rotator cuff tissue; and the healing of rotator cuff was evaluated by Sugaya classification at 12 months after operation. Patients in both groups were followed up 1 year. There was no complication such as muscle atrophy, joint stiffness, or postoperative rotator cuff tear. The intra-group comparison showed that the scores of pain, subjective influence, flexion, abduction, and muscle strength in Constant-Murley scores at each time point after operation in the two groups were significantly higher than those before operation, while VAS scores were significantly lower than those before operation ( P<0.05). Internal rotation, external rotation, and total score of Constant-Murley score in the two groups were lower at 6 weeks due to abduction immobilization within 6 weeks after operation, and gradually increased at 6 months after operation, with significant differences at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation when compared with those before operation and at 6 weeks after operation ( P<0.05). The T2* values of the two groups showed a downward trend over time, and there were significant differences between the two groups at other time points ( P<0.05), except that there was no significant difference between at 6 and 12 months after operation in the single-row group and between at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation in the double-row group ( P>0.05). The comparison between groups showed that the VAS score and T2* values of the double-row group were significantly lower than those of the single-row group at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after operation ( P<0.05). The scores of subjective influence, flexion, abduction, and internal rotation in the double-row group were significantly better than those in the single-row group at 6 weeks and 3 months after operation ( P<0.05), and the external rotation score and total score in the double-row group were significantly better than those in the single-row group at 3 months after operation ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference at 6 and 12 months after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in muscle strength and pain scores between the two groups at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the results of Sugaya classification between the two groups at 12 months after operation ( Z=1.060, P=0.289). The effectiveness of arthroscopic repair of moderate rotator cuff tears with modified Mason-Allen technique and double-row suture bridge technique is satisfactory, but suture bridge technique is helpful to the early rehabilitation training of shoulder joint and the recovery of motor function of patients.

Is biceps tenodesis necessary when performing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients older than 55 years?

In patients with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, tenotomy and tenodesis are the most performed surgical procedures for the biceps long head (BLH) pathologies. Controversy continues as to which surgical procedure provides better results. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of tenotomy and tenodesis applied to the biceps long head in patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. In our study, the clinical results of 706 patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with tenotomy or tenodesis on the long biceps head were evaluated retrospectively. Rotator cuff repair patients were divided into two groups as single-row and double-row repair patients. The clinical results of patients who underwent tenotomy and tenodesis in single-row (n = 383) and double-row (n = 323) repair groups were compared. The clinical outcomes of the patients who underwent tenotomy and tenodesis without distinction between double/single-row repair were also compared. Preoperative and postoperative clinical evaluations of the patients were made with Constant Shoulder Score (CSS) and visual pain scale (VAS). The presence of the Popeye sign in the arm, tenderness in the bicipital groove, and cramping in the biceps muscle in the postoperative period was evaluated and compared among groups. Preoperative and postoperative clinical results of the patients were compared within the groups. A total of 706 patients with a mean age of 61.78 ± 20.94years and a mean follow-up period of 29.15 ± 14.28months were evaluated. The mean age of the tenodesis group (58.13 ± 8.47) was significantly lower than the tenotomy group (61.52 ± 22.58) (p < 0.05). The mean CSS and VAS mean postoperatively in the tenotomy group (n = 587) were 76.84 ± 12.74 and 2.29 ± 2.78. The postoperative mean CSS and VAS in the tenodesis group (n = 119) were 77.56 ± 11.23 and 2.64 ± 2.70. There was no statistically significant difference between the postoperative clinical scores of patients who underwent tenotomy and patients who underwent tenodesis (p > 0.05). There was no difference between the tenotomy and tenodesis groups regarding Popeye deformity (p = 0.980). Bicipital groove tenderness and cramping in the biceps muscle were significantly higher in the tenodesis group (p < 0.001, < 0.001). Tenodesis was performed in 68, and tenotomy was performed in 315 out of 383 patients who underwent single-row rotator cuff repair. Tenodesis was performed in 51, and tenotomy was performed in 272 of 334 patients who underwent double-row rotator cuff repair. When singe versus double-row groups was compared, there was no significant difference in VAS, CSS, Popeye sing, bicipital groove tenderness, or biceps muscle cramping. When tenotomy versus tenodesis was compared within single- and double-row repair groups, there was no significant difference in VAS or CSS. There was no difference between the tenotomy and tenodesis groups regarding Popeye deformity, but bicipital groove tenderness and muscle cramping were more in tenodesis groups regardless of the repair rows. The effect of tenodesis versus tenotomy for BHL pathologies in patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was not significant for clinical scores, but bicipital groove tenderness and biceps muscle cramping were significantly higher in the tenodesis group.

Reparo artroscópico da lesão de manguito rotador: Uma análise da função, força muscular e dor entre técnicas de fileira simples e fileira dupla

Objective To evaluate the patients submitted to arthroscopic repair of the rotator cuff (RC), comparing the functional results, muscle strength, and pain obtained after single row (SR) and double row (DR) techniques. Methods Data were collected at the postoperative follow-up (minimum of 12 months) of 128 patients submitted to arthroscopic RC repair from 2011 to 2018. The clinical-functional variables were collected through the clinical examination, and the demographic, surgical and injury variables of the RC were collected from the electronic medical records. The results were compared between the SR and DR groups. Results The DR group showed higher anterior elevation strength when compared with the SR group (SF: 4.72 ± 2.73 kg versus DR: 5.90 ± 2.73 kg; p = 0.017). The other variables of muscle strength, Constant-Murley Score, University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale (UCLA), and pain, were similar. Performing the stratification by size, in the analysis of small and medium injuries, no differences were found between the groups. However, in the analysis of large and extensive injuries, patients submitted to DR presented superiority of both muscle lifting strength (SF: 3.98 ± 2.24 kg versus DR: 6.39 ± 2.73 kg) and Constant score (SF: 81 ± 10 versus DR: 88 ± 7). Conclusion The use of the DR technique in arthroscopic RC repair allowed higher levels of muscle strength for anterior shoulder elevation when compared with the SF technique. Data stratification in large and extensive injuries showed superiority of anterior shoulder elevation muscle strength and of the Constant score in patients submitted to DR.

A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Single-Row With Double-Row Fixation in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Long-Term Follow-up

Background: The long-term outcomes of single- versus double-row fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair are not currently known. Purpose: To compare the treatment effects of the single- versus double-row suture technique in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair of full-thickness tears at 10-year follow-up. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Patients were evaluated at 10 years postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC). Secondary outcome measures included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Constant score, strength, and incidence of revision surgery. Ultrasound was used to evaluate the rotator cuff to determine repair integrity. Statistical analyses consistent with those of the main trial were conducted. Results: Of the original 90 participants, 77 (85%) returned at a mean follow-up of 10 years. At ten year follow-up, the WORC score was higher in the double row group (79.9 [95% CI, 16.2 to 99.1]) compared with the single row group (72.9, [95% CI, 4.3 to 100]), P = .020. From baseline to 2 years, the mean change in WORC scores for the single-row group was –48.5 compared with −40.6 for the double-row group, with a between-group difference of −7.8 (95% CI, −20.4 to 4.7). From 2 to 10 years, the change in WORC scores for the single-row group was 11.5 compared with −0.2 for the double-row group, with a between-group difference of 11.7 (95% CI, −0.7 to 24.3). From baseline to 10 years, the mean between-group difference was 3.9 (95% CI, −7.8 to 15.6). Similarly, a decrease in ASES scores was observed between 2 and 10 years for the single-row group (9.2 [95% CI, 0.9 to 17.5]; P = .029), with a nonsignificant decrease in ASES scores for the double-row group (6.2 [95% CI, −3.2 to 15.6]; P = .195) as well as a decrease in Constant scores for both the single- (9.5 [95% CI, 1.4 to 17.5]; P = .020) and double-row (14.4 [95% CI, 5.6 to 23.3]; P = .001) groups. Overall, 3 participants developed a full-thickness tear after 2 years: 2 from the double-row group and 1 from the single-row group. One participant from each study group underwent revision surgery after the 2-year time point. Conclusion: A statistically significant (but likely not clinically important) difference in WORC scores was seen at 10-year follow-up in favor of double-row fixation. Between baseline and 10-year follow-up, a decrease in most outcome scores was observed in both the single- and the double-row groups. Registration: NCT00508183 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Increased acromiohumeral distance in a double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery compared to a single-row surgery after 12 months

BackgroundArthroscopic rotator cuff surgery is an effective treatment for rotator cuff tears with the considered use of double-row repair techniques becoming popular in the last decade. We aim to compare the effects of double- and single-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs (ARCR) on repair integrity (RI) and acromiohumeral distance (AHD).MethodsIn this observational study, we retrospectively identified 98 patients with degenerative rotator cuff tear treated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair between 2016 and 2019. We excluded 22 patients with partial-thickness tears, 15 with associated subscapularis or SLAP tears, 13 with massive tears, and 5 patients lost to follow-up; we included 43 patients who had ARCR for full-thickness cuff tear and clinical, radiologic follow-up. Of these 43 patients, 23 are grouped as double-row repair group (DRG) and 20 as single-row repair group (SRG). A minimum of 12 months after the surgery, bilateral shoulder MRIs were obtained. Contralateral shoulders without asymptomatic rotator cuff tears served as a control group (CG). The operating surgeon and two other surgeons experienced in arthroscopy blindly measured the AHD and determined the RI at the control MRIs in all groups. Functional assessments relied on UCLA and qDASH Scores.ResultsThe mean age was 57.89 (45–78) years, and the mean follow-up time was 28,65 (21–43) months. The mean AHD of the CG was 9.7 ± 0.96 mm, the preoperative AHD of DRG was 8.62 ± 1.45 mm, and SRG was 9.71 ± 0.95 mm. The postoperative mean AHD of DRG 9.61 ± 1.83 mm and SRG was 10.21 ± 1.97 mm. AHD differences between the preoperative and postoperative groups were significant (P=0.009). The increase of the AHD in the double-row group was significantly higher than the single-row group (P=0.004). There was a high correlation between the RI and DASH scores (P=0.005). RI did not correlate with the repair method (P=0.580).ConclusionAlthough double-row repairs can maintain greater AHD than single-row repairs in the clinical setting, this difference did not affect functional results. Regardless of the surgical intervention, functional results are favourable if RI is achieved.Level of evidenceLevel III, Retrospective Cohort Study

Intratendinous Strain Variations of the Supraspinatus Tendon Depending on Repair Technique: A Biomechanical Analysis Regarding the Cause of Medial Cuff Failure

Background: Double-row (DR) and transosseous-equivalent (TOE) techniques for rotator cuff repair offer more stability and promote better tendon healing compared with single-row (SR) repairs and are preferred by many surgeons. However, they can lead to more disastrous retear patterns with failure at the medial anchor row or the musculotendinous junction. The biomechanics of medial cuff failure have not been thoroughly investigated thus far. Purpose: To investigate the intratendinous strain distribution within the supraspinatus tendon depending on repair technique. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Twelve fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were used. The intratendinous strain within the supraspinatus tendon was analyzed in 2 regions—(1) at the footprint at the greater tuberosity and (2) medial to the footprint up to the musculotendinous junction—using a high-resolution 3-dimensional camera system. Testing was performed at submaximal loads of 40 N, 60 N, and 80 N for intact tendons, after SR repair, after DR repair, and after TOE repair. Results: The tendon strain of the SR group differed significantly in both regions from that of the intact tendons and the TOE group at 40 N (P≤ .043) and from the intact tendons, the DR group, and the TOE group at 60 N and 80 N (P≤ .048). SR repairs showed more tendon elongation at the footprint and less elongation medial to the footprint. DR and TOE repairs did not provide significant differences in tendon strain when compared with the intact tendons. However, the increase in tendon strain medial to the footprint from 40 N to 80 N was significantly more pronounced in the DR and TOE group (P≤ .029). Conclusion: While DR and TOE repair techniques more closely reproduced the strains of the supraspinatus tendon than did SR repair in a cadaveric model, they showed a significantly increased tendon strain at the musculotendinous junction with higher loads in comparison with the intact tendon. Clinical Relevance: DR and TOE rotator cuff reconstructions lead to a more anatomic tendon repair. However, their use has to be carefully evaluated whenever tendon quality is diminished, as they lead to a more drastic increase in tendon strain medial to the footprint, putting these repairs at risk of medial cuff failure.

Superior Capsular Reconstruction With the Long Head of the Biceps Autograft Prevents Infraspinatus Retear in Massive Posterosuperior Retracted Rotator Cuff Tears

Background: Materials and patches with increased biomechanical and biological properties and superior capsular reconstruction may change the natural history of massive rotator cuff tears (RCTs). Purpose: To compare structural and clinical outcomes among 3 surgical techniques for the treatment of massive posterosuperior RCTs: double-row (DR) technique, transosseous-equivalent (TOE) technique with absorbable patch reinforcement, and superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) with the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) autograft. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence 3. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the 3 techniques in patients who underwent repair of massive posterosuperior RCTs between January 2007 and March 2017. All patients completed preoperative and 24-month postoperative evaluations: range of motion, subjective shoulder value, Simple Shoulder Test, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, visual analog scale for pain, and Constant score. Tendon integrity was assessed with ultrasound 1 year postoperatively. Results: A total of 82 patients completed the final evaluation (28 patients, DR; 30 patients, TOE + patch; 24 patients, SCR with LHBT). Groups were statistically comparable preoperatively, except for active forward elevation and tendon retraction, which were significantly worse in the SCR group (P = .008 and P = .001, respectively). After 24 months, the mean ± SD scores for the respective groups were as follows: 76 ± 10, 72 ± 15, and 77 ± 10 for the Constant score (P = .35); 84 ± 10, 84 ± 15, and 80 ± 15 for the ASES (P = .61); 9 ± 2, 9 ± 3, and 8 ± 3 for the Simple Shoulder Test (P = .23); 82 ± 15, 80 ± 18, and 75 ± 18 for the subjective shoulder value (P = .29); and 1.4 ± 1.7, 1.8 ± 2, and 1.4 ± 1.4 for the visual analog scale (P = .65). The strength of the operated shoulder was 4 ± 3 kg, 4.7 ± 3 kg, and 6.4 ± 1.6 kg for the DR, TOE + patch, and SCR groups, respectively (P = .006). At 12 months postoperatively, 60.7% (17 of 28) of the DR group, 56.7% (17 of 30) of the TOE + patch group, and 91.7% (22 of 24) of the SCR group remained healed on ultrasound. The infraspinatus tendon remained healed in 75% of the DR group, 76.5% of the TOE + patch group, and 100% of the SCR with the LHBT group (P = .006). Conclusion: In cases of massive posterosuperior RCTs, SCR with the LHBT should be considered a reliable, cost-effective treatment option that protects infraspinatus integrity.

The clinical and radiologic outcome of microfracture on arthroscopic repair for full-thickness rotator cuff tear

The persistent incidence of retear despite improvements in techniques led orthopedic surgeons to the application of principles of tissue bioengineering to achieve enhanced repair and functional outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and radiologicoutcomes of arthroscopic single-row repair augmented with microfracture (SRM) at the greater tuberosity with single-row (SR) and double-row (DR) repair in the treatment of full-thickness rotator cuff tears. This is a retrospective comparative study. A total of 123 patients were enrolled for arthroscopic repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears, with 40 patients treated by SR, 44 by SRM, and 39 by DR. The minimum follow-up was 2 years. The primary outcome was retear rate, which was detected by magnetic resonance imaging, and the secondary outcome was functional outcome. The mean age of the patients was 59.2 years, 58.1 years, and 60.6 years in the SR, SRM, and DR groups, respectively. The retear rate was 33%, 14%, and 36% in the SR, SRM, and DR groups, respectively(P = .045). The SRM group had significantly improved functional outcomes compared with the SR and DR groups in terms of the postoperative Constant score and visual analog scale score (P = .001 and .002, respectively). Delta Constant scores were nonsignificant for retear and intact tendons(P = .137). SRM has a significantly lower retear rate and better functional outcome than SR and DR repair.

Arthroscopic Repair of the Isolated Subscapularis Full-Thickness Tear: Single- Versus Double-Row Suture-Bridge Technique

Background: No clinical comparative study has addressed isolated subscapularis tears after arthroscopic repair with either single-row or double-row suture-bridge technique. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study is to compare clinical outcomes and structural integrity after arthroscopic repair of an isolated subscapularis full-thickness tear with either the single-row technique or the double-row suture-bridge technique. The authors hypothesized that there would be no significant differences in clinical outcomes and structural integrity between approaches. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: This study included 56 patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of an isolated subscapularis full-thickness tear with grade II or less fatty infiltration in the subscapularis muscle with either a single-row technique (n = 31) or a double-row suture-bridge technique (n = 25). Functional outcomes were assessed with the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder score, and active range of motion. Magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) or computed tomographic arthrography (CTA) was performed 6 months after surgery to assess the structural integrity of the repaired tendon. Results: At the 2-year follow-up, all scoring parameters applied (VAS, SSV, ASES, and UCLA), subscapularis strength, and active range of motion improved significantly in both groups as compared with preoperative values (P < .001). However, there were no significant differences between groups in any of these clinical outcome measurements (VAS, 1.2 vs 1.1; SSV, 91.3 vs 91.8; ASES, 91.0 vs 91.4; UCLA, 31.9 vs 32.1). On follow-up MRA or CTA, the overall retear rate did not differ significantly between the single-row group (13%, 4 of 31) and the double-row group (12%, 3 of 25). Conclusion: Arthroscopic single-row repair and double-row suture-bridge repair of isolated full-thickness subscapularis tears both yielded satisfactory clinical outcomes and structural integrity with no significant differences among patients with good muscle quality.

Single- Versus Double-Row Repair of Hip Abductor Tears: A Biomechanical Matched Cadaver Study

The purposes of this study were (1) to evaluate the percentage of gluteus medius and minimus tendon footprint restoration that can be achieved with fixation using single-row repair versus double-row repair and (2) to evaluate the yield load of a repair of the gluteus medius and minimus tendon using single-row versus double-row repair techniques. Twelve human fresh-frozen cadaveric hip specimens (6 matched pairs, 4 female, mean age 47.5 ± 14.5years) were tested. Specimens were excluded if they had any prior hip surgery or injury, if any abnormality of the tendon was noted on dissection, or if they had a body mass index <20 or >35 or a T-score <2.0 on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scanning. Matched pairs were randomized to receive either double-row repair with 2 standard suture anchors and 2knotless anchor devices or a single-row repair with suture anchors only. The percentage of the footprint area covered after repair was determined using a computer-assisted digitization algorithm. With a mechanical testing system, each repaired specimen was tested for mechanical strength first with cyclic loading and then load to failure testing. Footprint coverage of the lateral facet was significantly greater for double-row repair (mean 76.6%) compared with single-row repair (mean 50.3%) (P= .03). There was no significant difference between single- and double-row repair for posterior-superior or anterior facet coverage. Mechanical testing showed a higher mean yield load for double-row anchor repair (197.6 ± 61.7N vs 163.5 ± 35.4N for single-row repair), but this did not reach statistical significance (P= .15). The predominant mode of failure was suture pullout through the musculotendinous unit (9/12 specimens: 5 double-row and 4 single-row). For hip abductor tears, double-row suture repair yields improved footprint coverage compared with single-row repair. Although it did not reach statistical significance, there was a higher mean yield load in the double-row group. Double-row suture fixation technique for hip abductor tears maximizes strength and footprint coverage of the repair.

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: single-row vs. double-row – clinical results after one to four years

ObjectiveEvaluate and compare the results of single-row (SR) vs. double-row (DR) arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. MethodsFrom December 2009 to May 2013, 115 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs were performed using suture anchors. After applying the exclusion criteria, there were 75 patients (79 shoulders) to be evaluated, retrospectively, of whom 53 (56 shoulders) attended re-evaluation. The patients were divided into two groups: SR with 29 shoulders, and DR) with 27 shoulders. The scoring systems for clinical evaluation were those of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES). ResultsThe mean follow-up period in the SR group was 37.8 months vs. 41.0 months in the DR group. The average UCLA score was 30.8 in the SR group vs. 32.6 in the DR group. This difference was not statistically significant (p>0.05). The averages measured by the ASES score also showed no significant difference – 82.3 and 88.8 in the SR and DR groups, respectively. ConclusionNo statistically significant difference was found between SR and DR arthroscopic rotator cuff repair performed by a single surgeon in the comparative analysis of UCLA and ASES scores.

Clinical outcomes and structural integrity of arthroscopic double-row versus suture-bridge repair for rotator cuff tears

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and retear rate between arthroscopic double row (DR) and suture bridge (SB) repair for rotator cuff tears. Postoperative Constant score and MRI findings were compared between 52 patients underwent DR repair and 63 patients underwent SB repair with medium tear of the supraspinatus. There was no significant difference in Constant score between the two groups. Postoperative MRI revealed that retear rate of SB group was significantly lower than DR group. This study suggests that SB repair can provide better clinical and structural outcomes compared with DR repair.

Do functional outcomes and cuff integrity correlate after single- versus double-row rotator cuff repair? A systematic review and meta-analysis study

The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of all available level I prospective randomized controlled trials comparing arthroscopic single-row (SR) with double-row (DR) rotator cuff repairs by both clinical outcomes and radiological re-tear rates. PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases search was done for level I RCTs comparing clinical and radiological outcomes after SR versus DR rotator cuff repair. Clinical outcomes included UCLA, ASES, Constant, WORC, and SANE scores; structural outcomes included MRI, MRA, or US. Seven level I studies were included (5 mid-term and 2 short-term). Postoperative ASES, Constant, WORC, and SANE scores showed nonsignificant slightly better function of DR groups. Only, UCLA score showed significantly better scores with DR repair (p=0.007). Full-thickness re-tear incidence was reported in 15/174 (8.6%) in DR group and 20/175 (11.4%) in SR group (p=0.44). Partial-thickness re-tear rate was reported in 18/174 patients (10.3%) in DR group and 41/175 patients (23.4%) in SR group (p=0.009). Within the domain of level I mid-term and short-term studies, DR repair showed significant better UCLA score only. (ASES, Constant, WORC, and SANE scores showed no significance.) This may correlate weakly with the significant lower partial-thickness re-tear rates of DR repairs. In contrary, long-term level III studies showed a direct correlation of both functional outcomes and cuff structural integrity, with significant superiority of DR over SR repair techniques. Level 1, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Single versus double row suture anchor fixation for greater tuberosity fractures \u2013 a biomechanical study

BackgroundFractures of the humeral greater tuberosity (GT) are a frequent injury progressively treated with arthroscopic suture anchor repair. Yet, no biomechanical study has been performed comparing fixation strength of arthroscopic single- (SR) vs. double row (DR) fixation.MethodsStandardized fractures of the greater tuberosity were created in 12 fresh frozen proximal humeri. After random assignation to the SR or DR group the fixed humeri were tested applying cyclic loading to the supraspinatus and infraspinatus tendon. Load to failure and fragment displacement were assessed by means of an electrodynamic material testing machine using an optical tracking system.ResultsLoad to failure values were higher in the DR group (649 N; ±176) than in the SR group (490 N; ±145) however without statistical significance (p = .12). In greater tuberosity displacement of 3–5 mm surgical treatment is recommended. The fixing constructs in this study did not reach displacement landmarks of 3 or 5 mm before construct failure as shown in previous studies. Thus the applied traction force (N) at 1 mm displacement was analyzed. In the SR group the load at 1 mm displacement was 277 N; ±46 compared to 260 N; ±62 in the DR group (p = .65).ConclusionThe results suggest that both techniques are viable options for refixation of greater tuberosity fractures.Level of Evidence: Laboratory study.

Reparo artroscópico do manguito rotador: fileira simples versus fileira dupla – Resultados clínicos após um a quatro anos

ObjectiveEvaluate and compare the results of single‐row (SR) vs. double‐row (DR) arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. MethodsFrom December 2009 to May 2013, 115 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs were performed using suture anchors. After applying the exclusion criteria, there were 75 patients (79 shoulders) to be evaluated, retrospectively, of whom 53 (56 shoulders) attended re‐evaluation. The patients were divided into two groups: SR with 29 shoulders, and DR) with 27 shoulders. The scoring systems for clinical evaluation were those of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES). ResultsThe mean follow‐up period in the SR group was 37.8 months vs. 41.0 months in the DR group. The average UCLA score was 30.8 in the SR group vs. 32.6 in the DR group. This difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The averages measured by the ASES score also showed no significant difference – 82.3 and 88.8 in the SR and DR groups, respectively. ConclusionNo statistically significant difference was found between SR and DR arthroscopic rotator cuff repair performed by a single surgeon in the comparative analysis of UCLA and ASES scores.

Arthroscopic Single-Row Versus Double-Row Suture Bridge Technique for Rotator Cuff Tears in Patients Younger Than 55 Years: A Prospective Comparative Study

Background: When arthroscopic rotator cuff repair is performed on a young patient, long-lasting structural and functional tendon integrity is desired. A fixation technique that potentially provides superior tendon healing should be considered for the younger population to achieve long-term clinical success. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose was to compare the radiological and clinical midterm results between single-row and double-row (ie, suture bridge) fixation techniques for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients younger than 55 years. We hypothesized that a double-row technique would lead to improved tendon healing, resulting in superior mid- to long-term clinical outcomes. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A consecutive series of 66 patients younger than 55 years with a medium to large full-thickness tear of supraspinatus and infraspinatus tendons who underwent arthroscopic single-row or double-row (ie, suture bridge) repair were enrolled and prospectively observed. Thirty-four and 32 patients were assigned to single-row and double-row groups, respectively. Postoperatively, tendon integrity was assessed by MRI following Sugaya’s classification at a minimum of 12 months, and clinical outcomes were assessed with the Constant score and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score at a minimum of 2 years. Results: Mean follow-up time was 46 months (range, 28-50 months). A higher tendon healing rate was obtained in the double-row group compared with the single-row group (84% and 61%, respectively [P < .05]). Although no difference in outcome scores was observed between the 2 techniques, patients with healed tendon demonstrated superior clinical outcomes compared with patients who had retorn tendon (UCLA score, 34.2 and 27.6, respectively [P < .05]; Constant score, 94 and 76, respectively [P < .05]). Conclusion: The double-row repair technique potentially provides superior tendon healing compared with the single-row technique. Double-row repair should be considered for patients younger than 55 years with medium to large rotator cuff tears.

An Anatomic and Biomechanical Comparison of Bankart Repair Configurations

Background: Suture anchor repair for anterior shoulder instability can be performed using a number of different repair techniques, but none has been proven superior in terms of anatomic and biomechanical properties. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to compare the anatomic footprint coverage and biomechanical characteristics of 4 different Bankart repair techniques: (1) single row with simple sutures, (2) single row with horizontal mattress sutures, (3) double row with sutures, and (4) double row with labral tape. The hypotheses were as follows: (1) double-row techniques would improve the footprint coverage and biomechanical properties compared with single-row techniques, (2) horizontal mattress sutures would increase the footprint coverage compared with simple sutures, and (3) repair techniques with labral tape and sutures would not show different biomechanical properties. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Twenty-four fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were dissected. The native labrum was removed and the footprint marked and measured. Repair for each of the 4 groups was performed, and the uncovered footprint was measured using a 3-dimensional digitizer. The strength of the repair sites was assessed using a servohydraulic testing machine and a digital video system to record load to failure, cyclic displacement, and stiffness. Results: The double-row repair techniques with sutures and labral tape covered 73.4% and 77.0% of the footprint, respectively. These percentages were significantly higher than the footprint coverage achieved by single-row repair techniques using simple sutures (38.1%) and horizontal mattress sutures (32.8%) (P < .001). The footprint coverage of the simple suture and horizontal mattress suture groups was not significantly different (P = .44). There were no significant differences in load to failure, cyclic displacement, or stiffness between the single-row and double-row groups or between the simple suture and horizontal mattress suture techniques. Likewise, there was no difference in the biomechanical properties of the double-row repair techniques with sutures versus labral tape. Conclusion: Double-row repair techniques provided better coverage of the native footprint of the labrum but did not provide superior biomechanical properties compared with single-row repair techniques. There was no difference in footprint coverage or biomechanical strength between the simple suture and horizontal mattress suture repair techniques. Clinical Relevance: Although the double-row repair techniques had no difference in initial strength, they may improve healing in high-risk patients by improving the footprint coverage.