Double-row Suture Anchor Repair Research Articles

Does Functional Rehabilitation Improve Outcomes After Double-row Suture Anchor Repair For Insertional Achilles Tendinopathy?

Does Functional Rehabilitation Improve Outcomes After Double-row Suture Anchor Repair For Insertional Achilles Tendinopathy?

Repair of gluteus medius tears with bioinductive collagen patch augmentation: initial evaluation of safety and imaging.

ABSTRACTThe purpose of this study was to perform an initial, prospective evaluation of imaging findings and outcomes after open surgical repair of gluteus medius tendon tears with bioinductive collagen patch augmentation. A prospective study was performed of patients with clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evidence of symptomatic gluteus medius tears who underwent open, double-row suture anchor repair with bioinductive bovine collagen patch augmentation. Preoperative and 6-month postoperative MRIs were reviewed by a fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologist, and outcome scores were recorded preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively [Hip Outcome Score (HOS) Sport; HOS Activities of Daily Living (HOS ADL); Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and International Hip Outcomes Tool (iHOT-33)]. Nine patients, four high-grade tears (≥50% tendon thickness) and five low-grade tears (<50% thickness) underwent surgical repair. At 6 months, 7/9 (77.8%) of tendons were qualitatively classified as completely healed on MRI, with no complications. Mean tendon thickness increased significantly: mediolateral dimension by 5.8 mm (P < 0.001), anteroposterior dimension by 4.1 mm (P = 0.02) and cross-sectional area (CSA) by 48.4 mm2 (P = 0.001). Gluteus medius and minimus CSA did not change significantly (P > 0.05). Patients demonstrated improvements in mean scores for HOS ADL, mHHS and iHOT that met defined minimum clinically important differences (P < 0.05). Open surgical repair of gluteus medius tendon tears with bioinductive collagen patch augmentation is safe and associated with increased tendon thickness on postoperative MRI. Early outcome scores are encouraging and should be evaluated after patients have completed postoperative rehabilitation to measure the whole effect of treatment.

Endoscopic Insertional Achilles Reconstruction with Double Row Suture Bridge Reconstruction: A Technique Tip

Category:Ankle; ArthroscopyIntroduction/Purpose:Insertional Achilles tendinopathy can be a debilitating condition that often fails to improve with non- surgical management such as bracing and physical therapy. Traditional surgical techniques include an open debridement of the diseased tendon and resection of calcaneal spurs. This is followed by repair of the tendon. Suture anchors are often used to secure the tendon, but recent advances in tendon fixation, including the advent of double row repairs, has allowed better biomechanical repairs and faster rehabilitation. Additionally, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and endoscopic techniques have advanced to allow successful treatment of all aspects of the condition while minimizing wound complications and infectionMethods:The authors present a technique to treat insertional Achilles tendinopathy and calcaneal bone spurs using MIS techniques while also incorporating a percutaneous double row suture anchor repair. The technique utilizes four portals to access two endoscopic working planes. The burr is inserted deep to the tendon and the calcaneoplasty is performed. Subsequently, the endoscope is inserted alongside a shaver to remove bony debris and debulk the anterior aspect of the Achilles areas of tendinopathy. Following this, the portals are used to place a double row suture anchor repair.Results:With over 75 surgeries performed, there have been zero wound complications and patients have been able to return to full weight bearing within 10 days after surgery. Follow up outcome data is currently being collected and will be reported as a case series once sufficient patients have completed their follow up.Conclusion:This study presents double-row repair following an endoscopic assisted MIS calcaneoplasty and Achilles debridement. The technique combines the benefits of the double row suture bridge repair with a minimal incision technique to debride the insertional tendinosis. In order to adequately debride the tendon and the posterior calcaneal tuberosity, the tendon foot print is elevated as the burr removes the bone at the insertion. The anterior portion of the tendon, which may be a pain generator as well, isdebrided endoscopically with the shaver. Finally, a double row suture bridge repair is performed in order to allow early weight bearing and rehabilitation.

The Addition of a Krackow Rip Stop Suture Augment After Achilles Tendon Debridement for Insertional Achilles Tendinopathy: A Biomechanical Study.

In the operative treatment of insertional Achilles tendinopathy, the Achilles tendon is often released from its insertion to allow for adequate debridement of pathologic tissue. The use of a double row suture anchor construct has become increasingly favorable among surgeons after Achilles tendon debridement. This study hypothesized that the addition of a Krackow rip stop suture augment to the double row suture anchor construct would increase the repair's maximum load to failure. A biomechanically stronger repair would potentially decrease the risk of catastrophic failure with early weight-bearing or accidental forced dorsiflexion after operative management for insertional Achilles tendinopathy. Fourteen cadaveric specimens were used to compare the 2 repair techniques. Achilles tendons were debrided and repaired using either a double row suture anchor with and without the additional Krackow rip stop suture augment. The 2 repair techniques were compared using an axial-torsion testing system to measure average load to failure. The average load to failure for the double row suture anchor repair alone was 152.00 N. The average load to failure for the tendons with the double row suture anchor with the Krackow rip stop augment was 383.08 N. An independent-samples Mann-Whitney U-test was conducted and the suture anchor plus Krackow augment group had a significantly higher load to failure (P = .011, Mann-Whitney U = 5.00, n1 = n2 = 7, P < .05, 2-tailed). This study confirmed that the addition of a Krakow rip stop augment to the double row suture anchor is able to increase the maximum load to failure when compared to the double row suture anchor alone. These results suggest the potential of this added technique to decrease the risk of catastrophic failure.

Endoscopic Haglund’s Resection and Percutaneous Double-Row Insertional Achilles Repair

Insertional Achilles tendinopathy can be a debilitating condition that often fails to improve with nonsurgical management such as bracing and physical therapy. Traditional surgical techniques include an open debridement of the diseased tendon and resection of calcaneal spurs. This is followed by repair of the tendon. Suture anchors are often used to secure the tendon, but recent advances in tendon fixation, including the advent of double-row repairs, has allowed better biomechanical repairs and faster rehabilitation. Additionally, minimally invasive surgery and endoscopic techniques have advanced to allow successful treatment of all aspects of the condition while minimizing wound complications and infection. The authors present a technique to treat insertional Achilles tendinopathy and calcaneal bone spurs using minimally invasive surgery techniques while also incorporating a percutaneous double-row suture anchor repair. The technique utilizes 4 portals to access 2 endoscopic working planes. The burr is inserted deep to the tendon and the calcaneoplasty is performed. Subsequently, the endoscope is inserted alongside a shaver to remove bony debris and debulk the anterior aspect of the Achilles areas of tendinopathy. Following this, the portals are used to place a double-row suture anchor repair.Levels of Evidence: Level V.

Achilles tendon-splitting approach and double-row suture anchor repair for Haglund syndrome

BackgroundHaglund syndrom is characterized as a painful posterosuperior deformity of the heel with possible causes as tight Achilles tendon, high-arched foot and tendency to walk on the outside of the heel. Surgical treatment may be recommended in cases where of insufficient response to nonoperative treatment. This study aims to evaluate the clinical and radiographic results of central Achilles tendon splitting and double-row suture anchor technique in the surgical treatment of patients with Haglund syndrome. Methods27 patients with Haglund syndrome who underwent central Achilles tendon splitting and double-row suture anchor were retrospectively evaluated. The results were evaluated by the pre- and post-operative American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale and visual analogue scale (VAS). All patients were evaluated radiographically to assess lateral talus-first metatarsal angle (TMTA), Calcaneal pitch angle (CPA), and the Fowler-Philip angle (FPA) preoperatively and postoperatively. ResultsThe mean preoperative AOFAS score was 47 ± 7 points; at the end of the follow-up period, it increased to 92 ± 4 points (p < 0.001). The mean preoperative VAS score was 9 ± 0.9 points; at the end of the follow-up period, it was 2 ± 0.6 points (p < 0.001). The lateral TMTA (preoperative: 5° ± 2°; follow-up: 4° ± 2°; p < 0.001), CPA (preoperative: 21° ± 5°; follow-up: 20° ± 5°; p = 0.005) and FPA (preoperative: 55° ± 6°; follow-up: 32° ± 3°; p < 0.001) values decreased at the end of the follow-up period. ConclusionIn the absence of an improvement to nonoperative treatment methods, central Achilles tendon-splitting approach appears to be an effective and safe treatment option. Level of evidenceLevel IV, retrospective case series.

Distal triceps transosseous cruciate versus suture anchor repair using equal constructs: a biomechanical comparison

Suture anchor-based repair has been advocated for repair of distal triceps avulsion, but previous models have used an unequal number of sutures across the repair site. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in triceps tendon displacement between gold standard repair with transosseous cruciate bone tunnels and suture anchor repair with an equal number of sutures in the constructs. The triceps tendon footprint was measured in 20 cadaveric elbows (10 matched pairs), and a distal triceps tendon rupture was created. The specimens in each pair were randomly assigned to transosseous cruciate repair or knotless, double-row, anatomic footprint, suture anchor repair. Specimens underwent cyclic loading to 1500 cycles and then load to failure. Footprint uncoverage was measured at 1500 cycles. Data for medial and lateral triceps tendon displacement, footprint uncoverage, and failure load were obtained. Triceps displacement did not differ significantly between the transosseous cruciate and the suture anchor repair group at 1500 cycles on the medial (3.6 ± 0.9 mm vs. 4.3 ± 1.6 mm [mean ± standard deviation], respectively; P = .27) and lateral side (3.1 ± 1.2 mm vs. 2.0 ± 1.2 mm, respectively; P = .06). No other differences were found between the constructs. Transosseous cruciate distal triceps repair and knotless double-row suture anchor repair using constructs with an equal number of sutures showed no significant difference in tendon displacement at 1500 loading cycles. These findings suggest that the biomechanical strength of an all-suture construct is not different from that of suture anchors for repair of distal triceps avulsions.

Arthroscopic Double-Row Suture Anchor Repair of Acute Posterior Bony Bankart Lesion

The treatment of anterior shoulder instability is well described with various techniques, including arthroscopic double-row repair, an alternative to open stabilization procedures in high-risk groups. The surgical management of posterior instability in high-risk and athletic populations is a less-explored entity. We describe our technique for an all arthroscopic double-row suture anchor repair of a large posterior bony Bankart lesion. We prefer this technique over percutaneous cannulated screw fixation because the double-row suture technique allows for incorporation of capsular plication with bony fixation in an effort to better restore normal anatomy for capsulolabral complex. Double-row repair capsulolabral repair or fixation of the bony Bankart is performed via a suture-bridge technique. Medial row anchors are placed down the glenoid neck and shuttled around the bony fragment and labrum. The lateral-row anchor is placed at the rim of the native glenoid. This repair technique has been shown to increase the surface area for healing and more closely reconstruct the native anatomic capsulolabral complex footprint, improve force distribution, and potentially impart enhanced posterior stability to the glenohumeral joint.

Ultrasonic evaluation of the repair integrity can predict functional outcomes after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair.

Despite proven accuracy of US for the evaluation of rotator cuff integrity, there is no US-based classification for this purpose. This study aimed to assess US for the evaluation of rotator cuff repair integrity in accordance with a well-established MRI classification. The authors retrospectively reviewed 257 patients who underwent arthroscopic double-row suture anchor repair for rotator cuff tears. Post-operative function was rated using the Constant score, the UCLA rating and the SSV, whereas repair integrity was assessed using US as described in the MRI classification of Sugaya et al. A total of 212 patients aged 55.6 ± 9.8 years had complete functional and radiographic assessments at a mean follow-up of 36.8 ± 11.6 months. Using all three ratings, repairs of Type I had highest scores, repairs of Type II had discernibly lower scores, whereas repairs of Types III, IV and V had similar intermediate scores. Comparison of the UCLA scores with those of Sugaya et al. revealed similar scores for repairs of Type I and of Type V. The scores are less comparable for repairs of Types II, III and IV, because US does not allow identification of partial tears if shielded by bony structures and because partial tears correspond to minimal impairment. The study reveals that US is an adequate imaging modality to classify rotator cuff repair integrity, which could reduce economic and practical burdens of CTA, MRI or MRA. The results also confirm that post-operative repair integrity and functional outcome depend on pre-operative tear size and fatty infiltration, which provides clinicians with reasoning for early surgical repair and warning of the risks of strenuous activity for patients with larger tears. Prognostic study, Level IV.

An in-vitro study of rotator cuff tear and repair kinematics using single- and double-row suture anchor fixation

Purpose:Double-row suture anchor fixation of the rotator cuff was developed to reduce repair failure rates. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of simulated rotator cuff tears and subsequent repairs using single- and double-row suture anchor fixation on three-dimensional shoulder kinematics. It was hypothesized that both single- and double-row repairs would be effective in restoring active intact kinematics of the shoulder.Materials and Methods:Sixteen fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulder specimens (eight matched pairs) were tested using a custom loading apparatus designed to simulate unconstrained motion of the shoulder. In each specimen, the rotator cuff was sectioned to create a medium-sized (2 cm) tear. Within each pair, one specimen was randomized to a single-row suture anchor repair, while the contralateral side underwent a double-row suture anchor repair. Joint kinematics were recorded for intact, torn, and repaired scenarios using an electromagnetic tracking device.Results:Active kinematics confirmed that a medium-sized rotator cuff tear affected glenohumeral kinematics when compared to the intact state. Single- and double-row suture anchor repairs restored the kinematics of the intact specimen.Conclusions:This study illustrates the effects of medium-sized rotator cuff tears and their repairs on active glenohumeral kinematics. No significant difference (P ≥ 0.10) was found between the kinematics of single- and double-row techniques in medium-sized rotator cuff repairs.Clinical Relevance:Determining the relative effects of single- and double-row suture anchor repairs of the rotator cuff will allow physicians to be better equipped to treat patients with rotator cuff disease.

Paper 34: Functional and MR Arthrography Imaging Evaluation After Arthroscopic Single Row and Double Row Suture Anchor Repair

Paper 34: Functional and MR Arthrography Imaging Evaluation After Arthroscopic Single Row and Double Row Suture Anchor Repair

Rotator Cuff Tendon Blood Flow in a Sheep Model – A Comparison of Single- vs. Double-Row Repairs (SS-19)

Double-row suture anchor repair of rotator cuff tears has been shown to be superior to single-row techniques with regard to footprint reconstruction, load to failure and tendon-to-bone contact pressures. We hypothesized that anchor repair can impair intratendinous blood flow and that the greater contact pressures of double-row techniques would compromise blood flow to a higher degree than single-row repair. The aim of this experimental study was to evaluate the effect of a double-row and a single-row technique on tendon blood flow in a sheep model. 18 sheep underwent detachment and immediate suture anchor repair of the right infraspinatus tendon using either an arthroscopic Mason-Allen suture or a double-row suture-bridge technique. Tendon blood flow was measured using laser Doppler flowmetry before detachment, immediately after repair and 12 weeks thereafter. Six regions of interest were measured, three over the lateral aspect of the footprint and three over the medial aspect. Immediately after repair, tendon blood flow decreased significantly in both repair groups when compared to the native tendons (P= .004). At 12 weeks, a significant increase in flow was observed in both repair groups when compared to the measurements immediately after repair (P= .016). In the single-row group, blood flow decreased by 87.5% after repair, in the double-row group the decrease was 90.6%. The difference between the groups was not statistically significant (P> .05). Subgroup analysis showed that blood flow over the lateral aspect of the footprint decreased by 90% in both groups, whereas over the medial aspect it decreased by 81% in the single-row and by 89% in the double-row group. However, none of these differences were found to be statistically significant. Intratendinous blood flow was significantly compromised immediately after suture anchor repair regardless of the technique used, but appeared to recover within 12 weeks. Since we did not find a significant difference between the two repair groups, our initial hypothesis was rejected.

Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial of Single- Versus Double-Row Suture Anchor Repair in 2- to 4-cm Rotator Cuff Tears: Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Results

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and the retear rates of arthroscopic single-row (SR) and double-row (DR) suture anchor repair in 2- to 4-cm rotator cuff tears. From 2005 to 2007, 71 patients with a 2- to 4-cm rotator cuff tear (proven by arthroscopy) were prospectively randomized to SR and DR repair groups. Of these patients, 62 (31 in each group) were available for evaluation at final follow-up. Demographic data, clinical scores, mean surgical times, and patient satisfaction were compared. Retear rates and clinical scores were also analyzed for 47 patients who underwent follow-up magnetic resonance imaging. Comparisons of demographic data, tear size on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, global fatty degeneration index, and concomitant procedures showed no differences between the SR and DR groups. Preoperative clinical scores were significantly improved postoperatively in both groups. No intergroup differences in pain visual analog scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Constant, or University of California, Los Angeles scores were found at final follow-up. Only mean surgical time was significantly different between the 2 groups. In the SR group, there were 4 full-thickness retears and 11 partial-thickness retears, whereas in the DR group, there were 6 full-thickness retears and 1 partial-thickness retear. However, despite numerical differences, these differences were not statistically different. Statistically, there were no significant differences both in full-thickness retear (P = .999) and retear including partial-thickness tear between the 2 groups (P = .124). This study indicates that the clinical results and retear rates of DR repair with 1 additional medial suture anchor were not significantly different from those of SR repairs with 2 lateral suture anchors in patients with medium to large rotator cuff tear. Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial of Single versus Double Row Suture Anchor Repair in Medium to Large Rotator Cuff Tears (SS-07)

Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial of Single versus Double Row Suture Anchor Repair in Medium to Large Rotator Cuff Tears (SS-07)

Comparative evaluation of the tendon-bone interface contact pressure in different single- versus double-row suture anchor repair techniques

The aim of the study was to evaluate the time zero contact pressure over a defined rotator cuff footprint using different repair and stitch techniques in an established sheep model. Forty fresh-frozen sheep shoulders were randomly assigned to five repair groups: single-row repair using simple stitches (SRA-s), single-row repair using horizontal mattress stitches (SRA-m), and single-row repair using arthroscopic Mason-Allen stitches (SRA-ama). Double-row repair was either performed with a combination of simple and horizontal mattress stitches (DRA-sm) or with arthroscopic Mason-Allen/horizontal mattress stitches (DRA-amam). Investigations were performed using a pressure-sensitive film system. The average contact pressure and pressure pattern were measured for each group. Contact pressure was lowest in SRA-m followed by SRA-s. SRA-ama showed highest contact pressure of all single-row treatment groups (P < 0.05). DRA-amam presented the highest overall contact pressure (P < 0.05), whereas DRA-sm exerted contact pressure equal to that of SRA-ama. Both double-row techniques showed the most expanded pressure pattern. Average contact pressures for the more complex single- and double-row techniques utilizing arthroscopic Mason-Allen stitches were greater than were those of the repair techniques utilizing simple and horizontal mattress stitches. However, the contact pattern between the anchors could be increased by using the double-row technique, resulting in more footprint coverage compared to patterns utilizing the single-row techniques. These results support the use of the more complex arthroscopic Mason-Allen stitches and may improve the environment for healing of the repaired rotator cuff tendon.

Biomechanical characteristics of single-row repair in comparison to double-row repair with consideration of the suture configuration and suture material

The aim of the study was to evaluate the time zero mechanical properties of single- versus double-row configuration for rotator cuff repair in an animal model with consideration of the stitch technique and suture material. Thirty-two fresh-frozen sheep shoulders were randomly assigned to four repair groups: suture anchor single-row repair coupled with (1) braided, nonabsorbable polyester suture sized USP No. 2 (SRAE) or (2) braided polyblend polyethylene suture sized No. 2 (SRAH). The double-row repair was coupled with (3) USP No. 2 (DRAE) or (4) braided polyblend polyethylene suture No. 2 (DRAH). Arthroscopic Mason–Allen stitches were used (single-row) and combined with medial horizontal mattress stitches (double-row). Shoulders were cyclically loaded from 10 to 180 N. Displacement to gap formation of 5- and 10-mm at the repair site, cycles to failure, and the mode of failure were determined. The ultimate tensile strength was verified in specimens that resisted to 3,000 cycles. DRAE and DRAH had a lower frequency of 5- (P = 0.135) and 10-mm gap formation (P = 0.135). All DRAE and DRAH resisted 3,000 cycles while only three SRAE and one SRAH resisted 3,000 cycles (P < 0.001). The ultimate tensile strength in double-row specimens was significantly higher than in others (P < 0.001). There was no significant variation in using different suture material (P > 0.05). Double-row suture anchor repair with arthroscopic Mason–Allen/medial mattress stitches provides initial strength superior to single-row repair with arthroscopic Mason–Allen stitches under isometric cyclic loading as well as under ultimate loading conditions. Our results support the concept of double-row fixation with arthroscopic Mason–Allen/medial mattress stitches in rotator cuff tears with improvement of initial fixation strength and ultimate tensile load. Use of new polyblend polyethylene suture material seems not to increase the initial biomechanical aspects of the repair construct.

Equivalent Clinical Results of Arthroscopic Single-Row and Double-Row Suture Anchor Repair for Rotator Cuff Tears: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Equivalent Clinical Results of Arthroscopic Single-Row and Double-Row Suture Anchor Repair for Rotator Cuff Tears: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Equivalent Clinical Results of Arthroscopic Single-Row and Double-Row Suture Anchor Repair for Rotator Cuff Tears

Background Restoring the anatomical footprint may improve the healing and mechanical strength of repaired tendons. A double row of suture anchors increases the tendon-bone contact area, reconstituting a more anatomical configuration of the rotator cuff footprint. Hypothesis There is no difference in clinical and imaging outcome between single-row and double-row suture anchor technique repairs of rotator cuff tears. Study Design Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods The authors recruited 60 patients. In 30 patients, rotator cuff repair was performed with a single-row suture anchor technique (group 1). In the other 30 patients, rotator cuff repair was performed with a double-row suture anchor technique (group 2). Results Eight patients (4 in the single-row anchor repair group and 4 in the double-row anchor repair group) did not return at the final follow-up. At the 2-year follow-up, no statistically significant differences were seen with respect to the University of California, Los Angeles score and range of motion values. At 2-year follow-up, postoperative magnetic resonance arthrography in group 1 showed intact tendons in 14 patients, partial-thickness defects in 10 patients, and full-thickness defects in 2 patients. In group 2, magnetic resonance arthrography showed an intact rotator cuff in 18 patients, partial-thickness defects in 7 patients, and full-thickness defects in 1 patient. Conclusion Single- and double-row techniques provide comparable clinical outcome at 2 years. A double-row technique produces a mechanically superior construct compared with the single-row method in restoring the anatomical footprint of the rotator cuff, but these mechanical advantages do not translate into superior clinical performance.

Biomechanical Evaluations of the Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Complex after Simulated Acute Injury (SS-26)

Biomechanical Evaluations of the Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Complex after Simulated Acute Injury (SS-26)

Arthroscopic Single-Row versus Double-Row Suture Anchor Rotator Cuff Repair

Background Recurrent defects after open and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair are common. Double-row repair techniques may improve initial fixation and quality of rotator cuff repair. Purpose To evaluate the load to failure, cyclic displacement, and anatomical footprint of 4 arthroscopic rotator cuff repair techniques. Hypothesis Double-row suture anchor repair would have superior structural properties and would create a larger footprint compared to single-row repair. Study Design Controlled laboratory study. Methods Twenty fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were randomly assigned to 4 arthroscopic repair techniques. The repair was performed as either a single-row technique or 1 of 3 double-row techniques: diamond, mattress double anchor, or modified mattress double anchor. Angle of loading, anchor type, bone mineral density, anchor distribution, angle of anchor insertion, arthroscopic technique, and suture type and size were all controlled. Footprint length and width were quantified before and after repair. Displacement with cyclic loading and load to failure were determined. Results There were no differences in load to failure and displacement with cyclic loading between the single-row repair and each double-row repair. All repair groups demonstrated load to failure greater than 250 N. A significantly greater supraspinatus footprint width was seen with double-row techniques compared to single-row repair. Conclusions The single-row repair technique was similar to the double-row techniques in load to failure, cyclic displacement, and gap formation. The double-row anchor repairs consistently restored a larger footprint than did the single-row method. Clinical Relevance The arthroscopic techniques studied have strong structural properties that approached the reported performance of open repair techniques. Double-row techniques provide a larger footprint width; although not addressed by this study, such a factor may improve the biological quality of repair.