Difference in the results of repair made with single or double rows according to the shape and size of the tear in arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery

Clinical value of three-dimensional ultrasonography in the morphologic evaluation of rotator cuff tear: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To study the clinical value of three-dimensional ultrasonography (3D-US) in the morphological evaluation of rotator cuff tears (RCTs).

METHODS

Based on previously published literature, RCT patterns in our study were divided into crescent, L-shaped with the remnant tendon retracted to the anterior rotator cuff (aL-shaped), L-shaped with the remnant tendon retracted to the posterior rotator cuff (pL-shaped), T-shaped (a tear pattern that is a combination of aL-shaped and pL-shaped), U-shaped, and massive type. Two radiologists prospectively assessed the tear patterns using 3D-US as well as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and compared these results using arthroscopy to calculate diagnostic accuracy.

RESULT

Fifty-two patients (52 shoulders) were enrolled. The overall diagnostic accuracy of 3D-US in evaluating RCT patterns (82.7%, 43/52; 95% CI: 72.1-93.3%) was significantly higher (p = 0.008) than that of the MRI (57.7%, 31/52; 95% CI: 45.8-73.4%). The accuracy of 3D-US was higher than that of MRI for most types of tears (crescent: 95.0% vs. 55.0%, aL-shaped: 83.3% vs. 77.8%, pL-shaped: 50.0% vs. 25.0%, T-shaped: 75.0% vs. 0.0%, and massive type: 80.0% vs. 100.0%). The accuracies of 3D-US with respect to evaluation by the two radiologists were 84.6% (44/52) and 76.9% (40/52), and there was substantial agreement evident (κ = 0.709). The time taken by the two radiologists to reconstruct the 3D-US images and evaluate the tear pattern was < 5 min.

CONCLUSION

The 3D-US can be used for the preoperative evaluation of RCT patterns, and thus be useful for the correct selection of the surgical repair technique for RCTs.

KEY POINTS

• Few studies have been found exploring the value of 3D-US for the morphological evaluation of RCTs and correlated with the arthroscopic findings. • Based on previous studies on the morphological classification, anterior L shape (aL-shaped), and posterior L shape (pL-shaped) were used for the first time to describe the torn patterns of RCT.

Three Medial All Suture Anchors Improves Contact Force Compared to Two Hard Body Anchors in a Biomechanical Two-Tendon Rotator Cuff Tear Model

Purpose

To biomechanically compare a knotless double-row construct with 3 medial all-suture (3AS) anchors with a standard 2 medial hard body (2HB) anchor construct.

Methods

Twelve matched cadaveric shoulder specimens with a mean age of 57 years (range: 54-61 years) were randomized to receive a knotless double-row repair with either a 3AS or 2HB construct. In the 3AS construct, three 2.6-mm all-suture anchors were placed adjacent to the articular margin and secured laterally with two 4.75-mm knotless hard body anchors. In the 2HB construct, two 4.75-mm medial hard body anchors were placed medially, lateral fixation was identical to the 3AS construct. Creep, displacement, stiffness, and ultimate load were recorded for each sample. In addition, a SynDaver model was used to compare contact pressure between the 2 repair constructs.

Results

There were no differences in cyclic displacement at 1, 30, and 100 cycles (P = .616, .497, .190, respectively), cyclic stiffness (.928), ultimate load (.445), or load to failure (P = .445) between the 2 constructs. The 3AS repair construct had improved contact pressure between tendon and bone when compared with the 2HB construct at loads of 20 N, 30 N, and 40 N (P = .01, .02, and .04, respectively).

Conclusions

Displacement and load to failure properties are similar between knotless constructs using either 2HB or 3AS for the medial row. However, contact force may improve with the use of 3 medial all-suture anchors.

Clinical Relevance

As all-suture anchors are smaller in size when compared with hard body anchors. For this reason, there is potential to place an additional all-suture medial anchor to improve contact force and potentially improve rotator cuff healing when compared with the use of hard body anchors.