Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction with Dermal Allograft for the Treatment of a Massive Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tear

A biomechanical study to optimize superior capsular reconstruction operative technique

Background

The goals of this study were to optimize superior capsular reconstruction by assessing the relative fixation strength of 4 suture anchors; evaluating 3 glenoid neck locations for fixation strength and bone mineral density (BMD); determining if there is a correlation between BMD and fixation strength; and determining which portal sites have optimal access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck for anchor placement.

Methods

Twenty cadaveric specimens were randomized into 4 groups: all-suture anchor (FiberTak), conventional 3.0-mm knotless suture anchor (SutureTak), 3.9-mm knotless PEEK (polyetheretherketone) Corkscrew anchor, and 4.5-mm Bio-Corkscrew anchor. Each specimen was prepared with 3 anchors into the glenoid: an anterosuperior anchor, superior anchor, and posterosuperior anchor. All anchors were inserted into the superior glenoid neck 5 mm from the glenoid rim. A materials testing system performed cyclic testing (250 cycles) followed by load-to-failure testing at 12.5 mm/s. Cyclic elongation, first cycle excursion, maximum load, and stiffness were recorded. Using custom software, BMD was calculated at each anchor location. This software was also used to assess access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck from standard arthroscopic portal positions.

Results

There was no significant difference in cyclic elongation (P = .546), first cycle excursion (P = .476), maximum load (P = .817), or stiffness (P = .309) among glenoid anchor positions. Cyclic elongation was significantly longer in the PEEK Corkscrew group relative to the other implants (P ≤ .002). First cycle excursion was significantly greater in the FiberTak group relative to all other implants (P ≤ .008). For load-to-failure testing, the Bio-Corkscrew group achieved the highest maximum load (P ≤ .001). No other differences in cyclic or failure testing were observed between the groups. No differences in stiffness testing were observed (P = .133). The superior glenoid rim had the greatest BMD (P = .003), but there was no correlation between BMD and cyclic/load outcomes. The posterior portal (80% of specimens) and the anterior portal (60% of specimens) demonstrated the best access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck, respectively.

Conclusion

The 4.5-mm Bio-Corkscrew anchor provided the most robust fixation to the glenoid during superior capsular reconstruction as it demonstrated the strongest maximum load, had minimal elongation, had minimal first cycle excursion, and did not fail during cyclic testing. The superior glenoid neck had the highest BMD; however, there was no correlation between BMD or glenoid anchor location and biomechanical outcomes. The posterior portal and anterior portal provided optimal access to the posterosuperior glenoid neck and anterosuperior glenoid neck, respectively.

The Number of Surgeons Using Superior Capsular Reconstruction for Rotator Cuff Repair Is Declining

Purpose

To investigate surgeon preferences for graft use, including biologic augmentation and superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) associated with surgical treatment of rotator cuff repair (RCR).

Methods

A 26-question survey was completed by arthroscopic shoulder surgeons. Surgeon demographics were evaluated. Surgeons were queried about shoulder arthroscopic graft use and rationale then responses were analyzed based on demographics.

Results

In total, 260 surgeons completed the survey. Fifty-one percent of surgeons reported a decrease in the volume of SCR use in the past 5 years. Less than 3% of surgeons used SCR in >90% of irreparable RCR cases, compared with 38% using SCR in <10% of irreparable cases (P < .05). Surgeons performing >100 RCR annually (42%; P < .05) and those employed in the hospital setting (44%; P < .05) reported an overall increase in the use of SCR. More international surgeons (67%) decreased their use of SCR compared with U.S. surgeons (44%; P < .05). In contrast, bioinductive graft use is generally on the rise, with 48% of surgeons reporting increased use since first use, although used in <10% of cases by 54% of surgeons. Sixty-eight percent of surgeons performing >100 RCRs annually used bioinductive grafts (P < .05). Fewer international surgeons (30%) performed biologic augmentation (P < .05). Suboptimal published outcomes (40%) and no perceived patient benefit (40%) were most cited for decreased SCR use. Surgeons reporting increased use cited improved personal patient outcomes (72%).

Conclusions

Arthroscopic surgeons report decrease in volume of SCR use in the past 5 years. Surgeon's personal experience of patient outcome and suboptimal published results were the strongest factors impacting decision-making. In contrast, bioinductive graft use is increasing. However, most surgeons use these grafts in a relatively small percentage of cases.

Clinical Relevance

Evaluation of scientific data, personal experience, and influences on surgical practice will give a comprehensive understanding of current RCR practices.

Advancement in Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction for Irreparable Massive Rotator Cuff Tear

Irreparable massive rotator cuff tear (IMRCT) was one of the causes of shoulder dysfunction, despite technical improvement, the failure rate of IMRCT was still demonstrated to be high. Traditional treatments like non-surgical treatments, partial rotator cuff repair, and tendon transfers could only achieve a slight improvement. A potential cause for high failure rate was the fact that traditional treatments cannot restore the superior stability of glenohumeral joint, and thus restricted the movement of shoulder joint severely. Superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) using a variety of grafts (autograft, allograft, xenograft, or synthetic grafts) provided a promising option for IMRCT. In surgery, graft was fixed medially to superior glenoid and laterally to the footprint of humeral greater tuberosity. SCR could increase the stability of the superior glenohumeral joint, decrease the subacromial pressure and acromiohumeral distance. This review summarized the relevant literature regarding the alternative grafts, surgery indications, operative techniques and clinical outcomes of SCR. we compared the different grafts, key surgical steps, the advantages and disadvantages of different surgical methods to provide clinicians with new surgical insights into the treatments of IMRCT. In conclusion, IMRCT without severe glenohumeral arthritis was the best suitable indication for SCR. The clinical outcomes were positive in the short-term and middle-term following-up. More studies were necessary to determine long-term results of this surgical procedure.

Editorial Commentary: Superior Capsular Reconstruction Works Biomechanically but Should Be Used Selectively for Genuinely Irreparable Tears

Superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) has undergone extensive biomechanical and clinical study. Systematic review of biomechanical studies has shown that SCR functions to depress the humeral head and improve the glenohumeral register, which provides proof of concept. Clinical studies have shown the short-term effectiveness of SCR, but this is influenced by graft type and thickness, as well as surgical technique. These studies are mostly flawed because follow-up is brief, postoperative imaging is often lacking, and the results may not be generalizable. Multiple systematic reviews pooling the results of these various clinical studies have mostly produced diluted conclusions that are not clinically helpful. To date, there is a dearth of comparative studies to help guide the selection of SCR over other treatment options such as subacromial balloon spacer, partial repair with or without augmentation, tendon transfer, reverse shoulder arthroplasty, or even continued nonoperative care. Additionally, SCR is a salvage operation rather than an expedient alternative to careful mobilization of a rotator cuff tear for primary repair. Ultimately, large-scale, long-term imaging-based comparative clinical studies, rather than additional systematic clinical or biomechanical reviews, must provide the evidence needed to determine the precise indications and optimal technique for SCR.