Triple-Row Technique Confers a Lower Retear Rate Than Standard Suture Bridge Technique in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repairs


      To compare the structural and clinical results between the knotless suture bridge (SB) and triple-row (TR) techniques.


      This study is a retrospective study and included 212 shoulders with repairable rotator cuff tears treated with the SB technique and 206 shoulders treated with the TR technique. In the TR technique, medial and lateral anchors were placed as they would be for the SB technique, with a middle row anchor added on the edge of footprint to reduce the torn tendons. All patients underwent primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and had magnetic resonance imaging 6 months postoperatively to evaluate for retear. Sugaya’s classification was used to classify the retear pattern. The function of all patients preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively were assessed by the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder index and the University of California at Los Angeles rating scale.


      According to Sugaya’s classification, 24 (11.3%), 6 (2.8%), and 20 (9.4%) in SB-treated shoulders and 16 (7.8%), 12 (5.8%), and 8 (3.9%) in TR-treated shoulders, respectively had types 3, 4, and 5. There was a statistically significant greater type 5 retear in SB-treated shoulders (P = .038) than in TR-treated shoulders. The average clinical outcome scores at the final follow-up improved significantly relative to those before the surgeries in both groups. There were no statistical differences in the clinical outcome scores at the final follow-up between SB and TR groups.


      The use of the TR technique in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair resulted in a lower large-size retear rate when compared with the use of the SB technique. No clinical differences were noted in the outcomes between the 2 groups.

      Level of Evidence

      Level III, therapeutic, retrospective cohort study.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Arthroscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Huijsmans P.E.
        • Pritchard M.P.
        • Berghs B.M.
        • van Rooyen K.S.
        • Wallace A.L.
        • de Beer J.F.
        Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row fixation.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89: 1248-1257
        • Pennington W.T.
        • Gibbons D.J.
        • Bartz B.A.
        • et al.
        Comparative analysis of single-row versus double-row repair of rotator cuff tears.
        Arthroscopy. 2010; 26: 1419-1426
        • Dukan R.
        • Ledinot P.
        • Donadio J.
        • Boyer P.
        Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with a knotless suture bridge technique: Functional and radiological outcomes after a minimum follow-up of 5 years.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 2003-2011
        • Ide J.
        • Karasugi T.
        • Okamoto N.
        • Taniwaki T.
        • Oka K.
        • Mizuta H.
        Functional and structural comparisons of the arthroscopic knotless double-row suture bridge and single-row repair for anterosuperior rotator cuff tears.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015; 24: 1544-1554
        • Gwark J.Y.
        • Sung C.M.
        • Na J.B.
        • Park H Bin
        Outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients who are 70 years of age or older versus under 70 years of age: A sex- and tear size-matched case-control study.
        Arthroscopy. 2018; 34: 2045-2053
        • Hein J.
        • Reilly J.M.
        • Chae J.
        • Maerz T.
        • Anderson K.
        Retear rates after arthroscopic single-row, double-row, and suture bridge rotator cuff repair at a minimum of 1 year of imaging follow-up: A systematic review.
        Arthroscopy. 2015; 31: 2274-2281
        • Rush L.N.
        • Savoie F.H.
        • Itoi E.
        Double-row rotator cuff repair yields improved tendon structural integrity, but no difference in clinical outcomes compared with single-row and triple-row repair: A systematic review.
        J ISAKOS. 2017; 2: 260-268
        • Mazzocca A.D.
        • Bollier M.J.
        • Obopilwe E.
        • et al.
        Biomechanical evaluation of arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs over time.
        Arthroscopy. 2010; 26: 592-599
        • Park M.C.
        • Peterson A.B.
        • McGarry M.H.
        • Park C.J.
        • Lee T.Q.
        Knotless transosseous-equivalent rotator cuff repair improves biomechanical self-reinforcement without diminishing footprint contact compared with medial knotted repair.
        Arthroscopy. 2017; 33: 1473-1481
        • Kim K.C.
        • Shin H.D.
        • Lee W.Y.
        • Han S.C.
        Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: Double-row versus suture-bridge technique.
        Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40: 294-299
        • Lee K.W.
        • Yang D.S.
        • Lee G.S.
        • Ma C.H.
        • Choy W.S.
        Clinical outcomes and repair integrity after arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair: Suture-bridge versus double-row modified Mason-Allen technique.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018; 27: 1953-1959
        • Mihata T.
        • Watanabe C.
        • Fukunishi K.
        • et al.
        Functional and structural outcomes of single-row versus double-row versus combined double-row and suture-bridge repair for rotator cuff tears.
        Am J Sports Med. 2011; 39: 2091-2098
        • Tanaka M.
        • Hayashida K.
        • Kobayashi A.
        • Kakiuchi M.
        Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with absorbable sutures in the medial-row anchors.
        Arthroscopy. 2015; 31: 2099-2105
        • Spang J.T.
        • Buchmann S.
        • Brucker P.U.
        • et al.
        A biomechanical comparison of 2 transosseous-equivalent double-row rotator cuff repair techniques using bioabsorbable anchors: cyclic loading and failure behavior.
        Arthroscopy. 2009; 25: 872-879
        • Boyer P.
        • Bouthors C.
        • Delcourt T.
        • et al.
        Arthroscopic double-row cuff repair with suture-bridging: A structural and functional comparison of two techniques.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23: 478-486
        • Hug K.
        • Gerhardt C.
        • Haneveld H.
        • Scheibel M.
        Arthroscopic knotless-anchor rotator cuff repair: A clinical and radiological evaluation.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23: 2628-2634
        • Rhee Y.G.
        • Cho N.S.
        • Parke C.S.
        Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using modified mason-allen medial row stitch: Knotless versus knot-tying suture bridge technique.
        Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40: 2440-2447
        • Ostrander R.V.
        • McKinney B.I.
        Evaluation of footprint contact area and pressure using a triple-row modification of the suture-bridge technique for rotator cuff repair.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012; 21: 1406-1412
        • Ostrander R.V.
        • Smith J.
        • Saper M.
        Triple-row modification of the suture-bridge technique for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.
        Arthrosc Tech. 2016; 5: e1007-e1013
        • Buckup J.
        • Smolen D.
        • Hess F.
        • Sternberg C.
        • Leuzinger J.
        The arthroscopic triple-row modified suture bridge technique for rotator cuff repair: Functional outcome and repair integrity.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020; 29: 308-315
        • Harris J.D.
        • Brand J.C.
        • Cote M.P.
        • Faucett S.C.
        • Dhawan A.
        Research pearls: The significance of statistics and perils of pooling. Part 1: Clinical versus statistical significance.
        Arthroscopy. 2017; 33: 1102-1112
        • Kim D.M.
        • Kim T.H.
        • Kholinne E.
        • et al.
        Minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.
        Am J Sports Med. 2020; 48: 2650-2659
        • Sugaya H.
        • Maeda K.
        • Matsuki K.
        • Moriishi J.
        Functional and structural outcome after arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair: Single-row versus dual-row fixation.
        Arthroscopy. 2005; 21: 1307-1316
        • Cho N.S.
        • Yi J.W.
        • Lee B.G.
        • Rhee Y.G.
        Retear patterns after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.
        Am J Sports Med. 2010; 38: 664-671
        • DeOrio J.K.
        • Cofield R.H.
        Results of a second attempt at surgical repair of a failed initial rotator-cuff repair.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984; 66: 563-567
        • Rossi L.A.
        • Rodeo S.A.
        • Chahla J.
        • Ranalletta M.
        Current concepts in rotator cuff repair techniques: Biomechanical, functional, and structural outcomes.
        Orthop J Sport Med. 2019; 7: 1-8
        • Boileau P.
        • Brassart N.
        • Watkinson D.J.
        • Carles M.
        • Hatzidakis A.M.
        • Krishnan S.G.
        Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness tears of the supraspinatus: Does the tendon really heal?.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87: 1229-1240
        • Liem D.
        • Lichtenberg S.
        • Magosch P.
        • Habermeyer P.
        Magnetic resonance imaging of arthroscopic supraspinatus tendon repair.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89: 1770-1776
        • Nho S.J.
        • Brown B.S.
        • Lyman S.
        • Adler R.S.
        • Altchek D.W.
        • Macgillivray J.D.
        Prospective analysis of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: Prognostic factors affecting clinical and ultrasound outcome.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009; 18: 13-20
        • Gazielly D.F.
        • Gleyze P.
        • Montagnon C.
        Functional and anatomical results after rotator cuff repair.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994; 304: 43-53
        • Sugaya H.
        • Maeda K.
        • Matsuki K.
        • Moriishi J.
        Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair: A prospective outcome study.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89: 953-960
        • Galanopoulos I.
        • Ilias A.
        • Karliaftis K.
        • Papadopoulos D.
        • Ashwood N.
        The impact of re-tear on the clinical outcome after rotator cuff repair using open or arthroscopic techniques—a systematic review.
        Open Orthop J. 2017; 11: 95-107
        • McElvany M.D.
        • McGoldrick E.
        • Gee A.O.
        • Neradilek M.B.
        • Matsen F.A.
        Rotator cuff repair: published evidence on factors associated with repair integrity and clinical outcome.
        Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43: 491-500
        • Russell R.D.
        • Knight J.R.
        • Mulligan E.
        • Khazzam M.S.
        Structural integrity after rotator cuff repair does not correlate with patient function and pain: A meta-analysis.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014; 96: 265-271
        • Davidson J.
        • Burkhart S.S.
        The geometric classification of rotator cuff tears: A system linking tear pattern to treatment and prognosis.
        Arthroscopy. 2010; 26: 417-424
        • Burkhart S.S.
        • Hartzler R.U.
        Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: How to avoid retear.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 12-13
        • Hayashida K.
        • Tanaka M.
        • Koizumi K.
        • Kakiuchi M.
        Characteristic retear patterns assessed by magnetic resonance imaging after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair.
        Arthroscopy. 2012; 28: 458-464
        • Kim K.C.
        • Shin H.D.
        • Cha S.M.
        • Park J.Y.
        Comparisons of retear patterns for 3 arthroscopic rotator cuff repair methods.
        Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42: 558-565
        • Gerhardt C.
        • Hug K.
        • Pauly S.
        • Marnitz T.
        • Scheibel M.
        Arthroscopic single-row modified Mason–Allen repair versus double-row suture bridge reconstruction for supraspinatus tendon tears: A matched-pair analysis.
        Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40: 2777-2785
        • Takeuchi Y.
        • Sugaya H.
        • Takahashi N.
        • et al.
        Repair integrity and retear pattern after arthroscopic medial knot-tying after suture-bridge lateral row rotator cuff repair.
        Am J Sports Med. 2020; 48: 2510-2517