• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2008.03a
• /
• pp.123-124
• /
• 2008

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.361-364
• /
• 2024

For most shoulder surgeons, addressing massive rotator cuff tears that have retracted ends poses a significant challenge. This study introduces a technique, termed the "sandwich augmentation technique," which incorporates the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) into a single-row rotator cuff repair. The procedure, performed arthroscopically with the patient in the lateral decubitus position, involves attaching the LHBT and rotator cuff tissues together to the greater tuberosity. This effectively sandwiches them within the rotator cuff footprint. The goal of this technique is to enhance the thickness of the fully interposed cuff margin, thereby providing better support for the repair. The sandwich augmentation technique, which integrates the biceps into the rotator cuff repair, has demonstrated positive clinical outcomes and moderate anatomical results. It also prevents superior migration of the humeral head in cases of large or massive rotator cuff tears. Further research is required to assess the long-term effectiveness of this procedure.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.8-15
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The object of this study was to investigate the difference in torque and pullout strength between the standard anchor insertion (5.0 mm) with a small awl (3.7 mm) and larger anchor insertion (6.5 mm), with a standard awl (5.0 mm) in osteoporotic humeral head. Materials and Methods: The embalmed 24 paired cadaveric shoulders were assigned to either Group A or B. After measuring the bone mineral density (BMD) of the ROI (region of interest) in the humeral head, 5.0 mm suture anchors were inserted using a 3.7 mm awl in Group A1, and the same 5.0 mm anchors were inserted using a 5.0 mm awl in Group A2. The 5.0 mm anchors were inserted using a 5.0 mm awl in Group B1, and 6.5 mm anchors were inserted using a 5.0 mm awl in Group B2. We measured the torques at the time of the anchor insertion and pullout strengths. Results: There was no significant difference in the BMD between the groups. The torque of A1 (20.6 $cN{\cdot}m$) was significantly higher than that of A2 (13.2 $cN{\cdot}m$), and the torque of B2 (20.8 $cN{\cdot}m$) was significantly higher than that of B1(12.1 $cN{\cdot}m$). However, the difference in the increased torque between group A and B was not significant. The pullout strength of A1 (204.2 N) was significantly higher than that of A2 (152.9 N), and the pullout strength of B2 (210.9 N) was significantly higher than that of B1 (149.5 N). However, the difference in the increased pullout strength between Group A and B was not significant. Conclusion: In severe osteoporosis, the use of a larger suture anchor with a standard awl increased the torque and pullout strength significantly, in comparison to the use of the same sized suture anchor and awl. If there is an inadequate interval between the anchors on the greater tuberosity, the use of a 3.7 mm awl and 5.0 mm anchor will be beneficial compared to that of a 5.0 mm awl and 6.5 mm anchor, considering that an increase in the pullout strength does not depend on the awl size.