A biomechanical comparison of subscapularis tenotomy repair techniques for stemless shoulder arthroplasty

Secondary Rotator Cuff Insufficiency After Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

» Secondary rotator cuff insufficiency is a challenging complication after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.» Acute tears may be amenable to open or arthroscopic repair in some instances.» Chronic attritional tears are best managed with revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty, especially in the elderly.» Increased glenoid inclination, larger critical shoulder angle, oversized humeral components, thicker glenoid components, and rotator cuff muscle fatty infiltration have all shown to contribute to tear risk.

Biomechanical Evaluation of the Efficacy of Suture Tape Augmentation for Subscapularis Peel Repair

Background

Failure of a subscapularis repair construct after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty can result in difficulty with internal rotation and an increased likelihood of dislocation. Although suture tape has been demonstrated to be an efficacious augment for tendonous repairs elsewhere in the body, it has not been investigated as a method for augmenting subscapularis peel repairs.

Purpose

To determine the biomechanical efficacy of suture tape augmentation for the repair of a subscapularis peel.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

Twelve human cadaveric shoulders underwent a subscapularis peel. Specimens were randomly split into 2 groups: 6 specimens underwent repair using a transosseous bone tunnel technique with 3 high-strength sutures placed with a Mason-Allen configuration (control group), and 6 specimens underwent the control repair using augmentation with 2 suture tapes placed in an inverted mattress fashion and secured to the proximal humerus using a suture anchor (augmentation group). Shoulders underwent biomechanical testing to compare repair displacement with cyclic loading, load at ultimate failure, and construct stiffness.

Results

There were no significant between-group differences in displacement after cyclic loading at the superior (P = .87), middle (P = .47), or inferior (P = .77) portions of the subscapularis tendon. Load to failure was significantly greater in the augmentation group (585.1 ± 97.4 N) than in the control group (358.5 ± 81.8 N) (P = .001). Stiffness was also greater in the augmentation group (71.8 ± 13.7 N/mm) when compared with the control group (48.7 ± 5.7 N/mm) (P = .003).

Conclusion

Subscapularis peel repair with augmentation via 2 inverted mattress suture tapes secured with an anchor in the proximal humerus conferred significantly greater load at ultimate failure and construct stiffness when compared with a traditional repair using 3 Mason-Allen sutures. There was no difference in repair displacement with cyclic loading between the repair groups.

Clinical Relevance

Suture tape augmentation of subscapularis peel repairs after shoulder arthroplasty provides an effective segment to the strength of the repair.

Biomechanical evaluation of subscapularis peel repairs augmented with the long head of the biceps tendon for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Subscapularis failure is a troublesome complication following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). Commonly discarded during aTSA, the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) may offer an efficient and cheap autograft for the augmentation of the subscapularis repair during aTSA. The purpose of this study was to biomechanically compare a standard subscapularis peel repair to 2 methods of subscapularis peel repair augmented with LHBT.

METHODS

18 human cadaveric shoulders (61 ± 9 years of age) were used in this study. Shoulders were randomly assigned to biomechanically compare subscapularis peel repair with (1) traditional single-row repair, (2) single row with horizontal LHBT augmentation, or (3) single row with V-shaped LHBT augmentation. Shoulders underwent biomechanical testing on a servohydraulic testing system to compare cyclic displacement, load to failure, and stiffness.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the cyclic displacement between the 3 techniques in the superior, middle, or inferior portion of the subscapularis repair (P > .05). The horizontal (436.7 ± 113.3 N; P = .011) and V-shape (563.3 ± 101.0 N; P < .001) repair demonstrated significantly greater load to failure compared with traditional repair (344.4 ± 82.4 N). The V-shape repair had significantly greater load to failure compared to the horizontal repair (P < .001). The horizontal (61.6 ± 8.4 N/mm; P < .001) and the V-shape (62.8 ± 6.1; P < .001) repairs demonstrated significantly greater stiffness compared to the traditional repair (47.6 ± 6.2 N). There was no significant difference in the stiffness of the horizontal and V-shape repairs (P = .770).

CONCLUSIONS

Subscapularis peel repair augmentation with LHBT autograft following aTSA confers greater time zero load to failure and stiffness when compared to a standard subscapularis peel repair.