Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery
Abstract Background The number of revision rotator cuff cases is increasing. The literature is lacking guidance or biomechanical evaluation for fixation strength in a revision case scenario. Therefore, the aim of the study was to provide biomechanical data investigating primary fixation strength of...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2018-07-01
|
| Series: | BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12891-018-2089-4 |
| _version_ | 1818007671507255296 |
|---|---|
| author | Felix Dyrna Andreas Voss Leo Pauzenberger Elifho Obopilwe Augustus D. Mazzocca Alessandro Castagna Cory Edgar |
| author_facet | Felix Dyrna Andreas Voss Leo Pauzenberger Elifho Obopilwe Augustus D. Mazzocca Alessandro Castagna Cory Edgar |
| author_sort | Felix Dyrna |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The number of revision rotator cuff cases is increasing. The literature is lacking guidance or biomechanical evaluation for fixation strength in a revision case scenario. Therefore, the aim of the study was to provide biomechanical data investigating primary fixation strength of a transosseous technique after anchor pullout failure of a single row reconstruction. It was hypothesized that an arthroscopic transosseous repair system as a procedure for rotator cuff revisions is providing equivalent stability compared to a primary single row suture anchor fixation due to change of fixation site. Methods Eight matched pairs (n = 16) of fresh frozen human shoulders were tested. The paired specimen shoulders were randomly divided into two repair groups (A single row and B primary transosseous repair). The potted specimens were mounted onto the Servohydraulic test system. Both groups were tested under cyclic loading followed by load to failure testing. Suture anchor repair shoulders (group A) that were tested to failure underwent a revision transosseous repair and were subsequently tested again using the same setup and protocol (group C). Results The mean native footprint areas did not show a significant difference between groups. The reconstructed footprint area showed a significantly greater coverage in favor of the transosseous repair. Ultimate load to failure of reconstructions with the primary anchor fixation (344.73 N ± 63.19) and the primary transosseous device (375.36 N ± 70.27) was not significantly higher compared to the revision repair (332.19 N ± 119.01 p = 0.45, p = 0.53). Conclusion The tested transosseous anchor device is a suitable option to widely used suture anchors, providing equivalent fixation properties even in a revision case scenario. Level of evidence Basic Science Study, Biomechanics. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-14T05:18:41Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a93541124ca0432ba0c7a5c85749e36e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2474 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-14T05:18:41Z |
| publishDate | 2018-07-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders |
| spelling | doaj.art-a93541124ca0432ba0c7a5c85749e36e2022-12-22T02:10:16ZengBMCBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders1471-24742018-07-011911710.1186/s12891-018-2089-4Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgeryFelix Dyrna0Andreas Voss1Leo Pauzenberger2Elifho Obopilwe3Augustus D. Mazzocca4Alessandro Castagna5Cory Edgar6Department of Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, Technical UniversityDepartment of Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, Technical UniversityDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of ConnecticutDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of ConnecticutDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of ConnecticutDepartment of Shoulder and Elbow IRCCS Humanitas InstituteDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of ConnecticutAbstract Background The number of revision rotator cuff cases is increasing. The literature is lacking guidance or biomechanical evaluation for fixation strength in a revision case scenario. Therefore, the aim of the study was to provide biomechanical data investigating primary fixation strength of a transosseous technique after anchor pullout failure of a single row reconstruction. It was hypothesized that an arthroscopic transosseous repair system as a procedure for rotator cuff revisions is providing equivalent stability compared to a primary single row suture anchor fixation due to change of fixation site. Methods Eight matched pairs (n = 16) of fresh frozen human shoulders were tested. The paired specimen shoulders were randomly divided into two repair groups (A single row and B primary transosseous repair). The potted specimens were mounted onto the Servohydraulic test system. Both groups were tested under cyclic loading followed by load to failure testing. Suture anchor repair shoulders (group A) that were tested to failure underwent a revision transosseous repair and were subsequently tested again using the same setup and protocol (group C). Results The mean native footprint areas did not show a significant difference between groups. The reconstructed footprint area showed a significantly greater coverage in favor of the transosseous repair. Ultimate load to failure of reconstructions with the primary anchor fixation (344.73 N ± 63.19) and the primary transosseous device (375.36 N ± 70.27) was not significantly higher compared to the revision repair (332.19 N ± 119.01 p = 0.45, p = 0.53). Conclusion The tested transosseous anchor device is a suitable option to widely used suture anchors, providing equivalent fixation properties even in a revision case scenario. Level of evidence Basic Science Study, Biomechanics.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12891-018-2089-4Rotator cuffCuff repairRevisionTransosseous repairArthroscopic repair |
| spellingShingle | Felix Dyrna Andreas Voss Leo Pauzenberger Elifho Obopilwe Augustus D. Mazzocca Alessandro Castagna Cory Edgar Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Rotator cuff Cuff repair Revision Transosseous repair Arthroscopic repair |
| title | Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery |
| title_full | Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery |
| title_fullStr | Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery |
| title_full_unstemmed | Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery |
| title_short | Biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery |
| title_sort | biomechanical evaluation of an arthroscopic transosseous repair as a revision option for failed rotator cuff surgery |
| topic | Rotator cuff Cuff repair Revision Transosseous repair Arthroscopic repair |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12891-018-2089-4 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT felixdyrna biomechanicalevaluationofanarthroscopictransosseousrepairasarevisionoptionforfailedrotatorcuffsurgery AT andreasvoss biomechanicalevaluationofanarthroscopictransosseousrepairasarevisionoptionforfailedrotatorcuffsurgery AT leopauzenberger biomechanicalevaluationofanarthroscopictransosseousrepairasarevisionoptionforfailedrotatorcuffsurgery AT elifhoobopilwe biomechanicalevaluationofanarthroscopictransosseousrepairasarevisionoptionforfailedrotatorcuffsurgery AT augustusdmazzocca biomechanicalevaluationofanarthroscopictransosseousrepairasarevisionoptionforfailedrotatorcuffsurgery AT alessandrocastagna biomechanicalevaluationofanarthroscopictransosseousrepairasarevisionoptionforfailedrotatorcuffsurgery AT coryedgar biomechanicalevaluationofanarthroscopictransosseousrepairasarevisionoptionforfailedrotatorcuffsurgery |