4.6 Article

Biomechanical and Biologic Augmentation for the Treatment of Massive Rotator Cuff Tears

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
卷 38, 期 3, 页码 619-629

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0363546509343199

关键词

rotator cuff; massive; tear; repair; biologics

资金

  1. Arthrex

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies have reported that massive rotator cuff tears do not heal as predictably as, and may have diminished clinical outcomes compared with, smaller rotator cuff tears. An improved understanding of the biologic degeneration and the biomechanical alterations of massive rotator cuff tears should provide better strategies to optimize outcomes. The approach to patients with massive rotator cuff tears requires careful assessment of the patient and the extent of rotator cuff degeneration to determine the appropriate treatment. For a rotator cuff tear that is repairable, the goal is to produce a tension-free, anatomical repair that restores the footprint using soft tissue releases and various suturing techniques, including double-row, transosseous-equivalent suture bridges or the rip-stop stitch. For irreparable cuff tears, the surgeon may elect to proceed with 1 of 2 approaches: (1) palliative surgical treatment-that is, rotator cuff debridement, synovectomy, biceps tenotomy, tuberoplasty and/or nonanatomical repair with partial repair; or (2) salvage treatment with various tendon transfers. Even though the biomechanical constructs for rotator cuff repairs have been improved, the integrity of the repair still depends on biologic healing at the tendon-to-bone junction. There has been much interest in the development of a scaffold to bridge massive rotator cuff tears and adjuvant biologic modalities including growth factors and tenocyte-seeded scaffolds to augment tendon-to-bone healing. The treatment of rotator cuff disease has improved considerably, but massive rotator cuff tears continue to pose a challenging problem for orthopaedic surgeons.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据