Background: After rotator cuff repair, the shoulder is immobilized in various abduction positions. However, there is no consensus on the proper abduction angle.
Purpose: To assess the effect of shoulder abduction angle on the biomechanical properties of the repaired rotator cuff tendons among 3 types of double-row techniques.
Study Design: Controlled laboratory study.
Methods: Thirty-two fresh-frozen porcine shoulders were used. A simulated rotator cuff tear was repaired by 1 of 3 double-row techniques: conventional double-row repair, transosseous-equivalent repair, and a combination of conventional double-row and bridging sutures (compression double-row repair). Each specimen underwent cyclic testing followed by tensile testing to failure at a simulated shoulder abduction angle of 0° or 40° on a material testing machine. Gap formation and failure loads were measured.
Results: Gap formation in conventional double-row repair at 0° (1.2 ± 0.5 mm) was significantly greater than that at 40° (0.5 ± 0.3mm, P = .01). The yield and ultimate failure loads for conventional double-row repair at 40° were significantly larger than those at 0° (P < .01), whereas those for transosseous-equivalent repair (P < .01) and compression double-row repair (P < .0001) at 0° were significantly larger than those at 40°. The failure load for compression double-row repair was the greatest among the 3 double-row techniques at both 0° and 40° of abduction.
Conclusion: Bridging sutures have a greater effect on the biomechanical properties of the repaired rotator cuff tendon at a low abduction angle, and the conventional double-row technique has a greater effect at a high abduction angle.
Clinical Relevance: Proper abduction position after rotator cuff repair differs between conventional double-row repair and transosseous-equivalent repair. The authors recommend the use of the combined technique of conventional double-row and bridging sutures to obtain better biomechanical properties at both low and high abduction angles.