Biomechanical Comparison of Knotless Wide Suture Double-row SutureBridge Rotator Cuff Repair to Double-row Standard Suture Repair

Background: A comparison of self-reinforcement and footprint compression between standard- and wide-diameter suture material in double-row SutureBridge repair techniques has not been performed. The aim of this study was to compare the self-reinforcement and footprint contact pressure generated under progressive tensile loads between 2 double-row SutureBridge rotator cuff repair techniques: 1 performed with FiberWire and 1 performed with FiberTape in a knotless technique.

Materials And Methods: Rotator cuff repairs were performed in 10 pairs of ovine shoulders. One group underwent a double-row SutureBridge repair using FiberWire. The other group underwent an identical repair with FiberTape. Footprint contact pressure was measured from 0° to 60° of abduction under loads of 0-60 N. Pull-to-failure tests were then performed.

Results: In both repair constructs at 0° of abduction, each 10-N increase in rotator cuff tensile load led to a significant increase in footprint contact pressure (P < .05). The rate of increase in footprint contact pressure was greater in the FiberTape construct (ratio, 1.68; P = .00035). In both repair constructs, the highest values for footprint contact pressure were seen at 0° of abduction. No difference in pull to failure, peak load, or total energy was found between the groups.

Conclusion: Self-reinforcement was seen in both double-row SutureBridge repairs with standard- and wide-diameter suture material but was greater in the repair with the wide-diameter suture material construct. Footprint compression is greater in a knotless double-row SutureBridge repair with wide-diameter suture material than in a knotted double-row SutureBridge repair with standard-diameter suture material at 20° of abduction.