Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The comparison of patellar tendon–bone autografting and free flexor-tendon autografting in infraspinatus defect of the shoulder: biomechanical and histological evaluation in a sheep model

  • Shoulder
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the biomechanical and histological features of patellar tendon–bone autografting and free flexor-tendon autografting, which were fixed by two different techniques at the tendon–bone junction in reconstruction of an infraspinatus defect in sheep. Merino type sheep (n=10) were divided into two groups. Following a defect in the infraspinatus tendon, in group I (flexor-tendon autografting) the free end of the flexor tendon was passed through the holes in the greater tuberosity for fixation. In group II (patellar tendon–bone autografting), fixation was obtained by impaction of the tibial bone plug to the greater tuberosity. Twelve weeks later, animals were sacrificed and specimens were evaluated biomechanically and histologically. Recovery of tensile mechanical properties was achieved to a level of approximately 50% in Group I and 70% in Group II at the end of the 12th week. No difference in the stiffness values was found. In group I, there was a difference between operated and contralateral (non-operated) tendons for the ultimate tensile strength values, but no difference was found in group II. Histologically, in group I, the defective area, which filled with a hypercellular connective tissue, could hardly be differentiated from the normal tendon tissue. In group II, complete incorporation of the bone block was seen in all specimens. These results suggested that patellar tendon–bone autografting is more advantageous than free flexor-tendon autografting in infraspinatus defect, providing rapid healing and better mechanical properties, especially in the early period of healing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aoki M, Uchiyama E, Ohtera K, Ishii S, Ontani S, Yamakoshi K (1999) Restoration of tensile properties at tendon insertion to bone by a patellar tendon–tibia autograft:An experimental study with canine infraspinatus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 8:628–633

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bigliani LU, Cordasco FA, McIlveen SJ, Musso ES (1992) Operative treatment of failed repairs of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:1505–1515

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dejardin LM, Arnoczky SP, Ewers BJ, Haut RC, Clarke RB (2001) Tissue engineered rotator-cuff tendon using porcine small intestine submucosa: histologic and mechanical evaluation in dogs. Am J Sports Med 29:175–184

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. DeOrino JK, Cofield RH (1984) Results of a second attempt at surgical repair of a failed initial rotator-cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 66:563–567

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gerber C, Schneeberger AG, Perren SM, Nyffeler RW (1999) Experimental rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:1281–1290

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Goradia VK, Rochat MC, Grana WA, Rohrer MD, Prasad HS (2000) Tendon-to-bone healing of a semitendinosus tendon autograft used for ACL reconstruction in a sheep model. Am J Knee Surg 13:143–151

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Guven O, Bezer M, Guven Z, Gokkus K, Tetik C (2001) Surgical technique and functional results of irreparable cuff tears reconstructed with the long head of the biceps tendon. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 60:13–17

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Habermayer P (1995) Die operative offene Therapie der Rotatorenmanschette. Orthopade 24:512–528

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Halder AM, O’Driscoll SW, Heers G, Mura N, Zobitz ME, An KN, Kreusch-Brinker R (2002) Biomechanical comparison of effects of supraspinatus tendon detachments, tendon defects, and muscle retraction. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84:780–785

    Google Scholar 

  10. Itoi E, Minagawa H, Sato T, Sato K, Tabata S (1997) Isokinetic strength after tears of the supraspinatus tendon. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79:77–82

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jones JR, Smibert JG, McCullough CJ, Price AB, Hutton WC (1987) Tendon implantation into bone: an experimental study. J Hand Surg [Br] 12:306–312

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kimura A, Aoki M, Fukushima S, Ishii S, Yamakoshi K (2003) Reconstruction of a defect of the rotator cuff with polytetrafluoroethylene felt graft. Recovery of tensile strength and histocompatibility in an animal model. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:282–287

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nasca RJ (1988) The use of freeze-dried allografts in the management of global rotator-cuff tears. Clin Orthop 228:218–226

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Neer CS II (1972) Anterior acromioplasty for the chronic impingement syndrome in the shoulder. A preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 54:41–50

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Neviaser JS (1954) Rupture of the rotator cuff. Clin Orthop 3:92–98

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Neviaser RJ, Neviaser TJ (1992) Reoperation for failed rotator-cuff repair: analysis of fifty cases. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1:283–286

    Google Scholar 

  17. Neviaser JS (1971) Ruptures of the rotator cuff of the shoulder. New concepts in the diagnosis and operative treatment of chronic ruptures. Arch Surg 102:483–485

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Neviaser JS, Neviaser RJ, Neviaser TJ (1978) The repair of chronic massive ruptures of the rotator cuff of the shoulder by use of a freeze-dried rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 60:681–684

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ozaki J, Fujimoto S, Masuhara K, Tamai S, Yoshimoto S (1986) Reconstruction of chronic massive rotator-cuff tears with synthetic materials. Clin Orthop 202:173–183

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sano H, Ishii H, Yeadon A, Backman D, Brunet JA, Uhthoff HK (1997) Degeneration at the insertion weakens in the tensile strength of the supraspinatus tendon: a comparative mechanical and histologic study of the bone–tendon complex. J Orthop Res 15:719–726

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sano H, Kumagai J, Sawai T (2002) Experimental fascial autografting for the supraspinatus tendon defect: remodeling process of the grafted fascia and the insertion into bone. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11:166–173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schlepekow P, Sigg A (2001) In vitro reconstruction of massive rotator-cuff ruptures with triceps tendon or coracoacromial ligament. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 121:286–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Solonen KA (1982) A method for reconstruction of the rotator cuff after rupture. In: Bayley I, Kessel I (eds) Shoulder surgery. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 45–48

  24. Tomita F, Yasuda K, Mikami S, Sakai T, Yamazaki S, Tohyama H (2001) Comparisons of intraosseous graft healing between the doubled flexor-tendon graft and the bone–patellar tendon–bone graft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 17:461–476

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Warner JPJ (2001) Management of massive irreparable rotator-cuff tears: the role of tendon transfer. Instr Course Lect 50:63–71

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Research Foundation of Karadeniz Technical University. The research protocol was approved by our institutional ethical committee for care and humane use of animals, and compliance with the guidelines for animal research from the National Institute of Health was maintained throughout the experiment. The authors thank Dr. Ersin Yaris and Dr. Murat Topbas for their assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical School, Karadeniz Technical University, 61080 , Trabzon, Turkey

    Muhittin Sener, Mehmet A. Altay, Celal Baki & Ahmet U. Turhan

  2. Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Abd, K.T.U. Tip Fak., 61080, Trabzon, Turkey

    Muhittin Sener

  3. Department of Pathology, Medical School, Karadeniz Technical University, 61080 , Trabzon, Turkey

    Umit Cobanoglu

Authors
  1. Muhittin Sener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehmet A. Altay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Celal Baki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ahmet U. Turhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Umit Cobanoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhittin Sener.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sener, M., Altay, M.A., Baki, C. et al. The comparison of patellar tendon–bone autografting and free flexor-tendon autografting in infraspinatus defect of the shoulder: biomechanical and histological evaluation in a sheep model. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 12, 235–240 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-003-0473-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-003-0473-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation