Volume 25, Issue 3 , Pages 274-281, March 2009
A Biomechanical Comparison of 2 Techniques of Footprint Reconstruction for Rotator Cuff Repair: The SwiveLock-FiberChain Construct Versus Standard Double-Row Repair
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical fixation parameters of a standard double-row rotator cuff repair with those of a knotless footprint reconstruction using the double-row SwiveLock-FiberChain technique (Arthrex, Naples, FL).
Methods
Seven matched pairs of human cadaveric shoulders were used for testing (mean age, 48 ± 10.3 years). A shoulder from each matched pair was randomly selected to receive a standard 4-anchor double-row repair of the supraspinatus tendon, and the contralateral shoulder received a 4-anchor double-row SwiveLock-FiberChain repair. The tendon was cycled from 10 N to 100 N at 1 Hz for 500 cycles, followed by a single-cycle pull to failure at 33 mm/s. Yield load, ultimate load, cyclic displacement, and mode of failure were recorded.
Results
Yield load and ultimate load were higher for the SwiveLock-FiberChain repair compared with the standard double-row repair for 6 of the 7 treatment pairs; however, 1 cadaver had a contrary outcome, so the overall mean differences in yield load and ultimate load were not significantly different from 0 by Student t test (P > .15). Furthermore, smaller differences between yield load and ultimate load for the SwiveLock-FiberChain repair in 5 of the 7 treatment pairs showed a self-reinforcing mechanism.
Conclusions
Double-row footprint reconstruction with the knotless SwiveLock-FiberChain system in this study had yield loads, ultimate loads, and cyclic displacements that were statistically equivalent to those of standard double-row rotation cuff reconstructions.
Clinical Relevance
The SwiveLock-FiberChain system's combination of strength, self-reinforcement, and decreased operating time may offer advantages to the surgeon, particularly when dealing with older patients in whom poor tissue quality and total operative time are important considerations.
Key Words: Biomechanical testing, Rotator cuff, Self-reinforcement, Knotless rotator cuff repair, Rotator cuff repair
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Supported by Arthrex, Naples, Florida. S.S.B. receives royalties from Arthrex related to the subject of this research. Research performed at Arthrex Biomechanics Laboratory, Naples, Florida.
PII: S0749-8063(08)00762-7
doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2008.09.024
© 2009 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Volume 25, Issue 3 , Pages 274-281, March 2009


