Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Single-row versus double-row arthroscopic repair in the treatment of rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomized clinical study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with single-row and double-row techniques because research has demonstrated the superiority of double-row repair from a biological and mechanical point of view but there is no evidence of clinical superiority.

Methods

A total of 160 patients with a full-thickness rotator cuff tear underwent arthroscopic repair with suture anchors. They were randomised into two groups of 80 patients according to the repair technique: single-row (group 1) and double-row (group 2). Results were evaluated by use of the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Constant questionnaires, the Shoulder Strength Index (SSI) and range of motion. Follow-up time was two years. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were performed on each shoulder preoperatively and two years after repair.

Results

One hundred per cent of the patients were followed up. All measurements showed significant improvement compared with the preoperative status. The UCLA score showed significant improvement in group 2. In over 30-mm tears UCLA and ASES showed significant differences. SSI showed significant improvement in group 2. Range of motion showed significant improvements in flexion and abduction in group 2. In under 30-mm tears group 2 showed also significant improvement in internal and external rotation. In MRI studies there were no significant differences.

Conclusions

At two years follow-up the double-row repair technique showed a significant difference in clinical outcome compared with single-row repair and this was even more significative in over 30-mm tears. No MRI differences were observed.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson K, Boothby M, Aschenbrener D, van Holsbeeck M (2006) Outcome and structural integrity after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using 2 rows of fixation: minimum 2-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 34:1899–1905. doi:10.1177/0363546506290187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Boileau P, Brassart N, Watkinson DJ, Carles M, Hatzidakis AM, Krishnan SG (2005) Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness tears of the supraspinatus: does the tendon really heal? J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(6):1229–1240. doi:10.2106/JBJS.D.02035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brady PC, Arrioni P, Burkhart SS (2006) Evaluation of residual rotator cuff defects after in vivo single- versus double-row rotator cuff repairs. Arthroscopy 22:1070–1075. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2006.05.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Burks RT, Crim J, Brown N, Fink B, Greis PE (2009) A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing arthroscopic single- and double-row rotator cuff repair: magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical evaluation. Am J Sports Med 37:674–682. doi:10.1177/0363546508328115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Charousset C, Grimberg J, Duranthon LD, Bellaiche L, Petrover D (2007) Can a double-row anchorage technique improve tendon healing in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? A prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of double-row and single-row anchorage techniques with computed tomographic arthrography tendon healing assessment. Am J Sports Med 35:1247–1253. doi:10.1177/0363546507301661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Curtis AS, Burbank KM, Tierney JJ, Scheller AD, Curran AR (2006) The insertional footprint of the rotator cuff: an anatomic study. Arthroscopy 22(6):609.e1. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2006.04.001

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Franceschi F, Ruzzini L, Longo UG, Martina FM, Zobel BB, Maffulli N, Denaro V (2007) Equivalent clinical results of arthroscopic single-row and double-row suture anchor repair for rotator cuff tears: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med 35(8):1254–1260. doi:10.1177/0363546507302218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Galatz LM, Ball CM, Teefey SA, Middleton WD, Yamaguchi K (2004) The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:219–224

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gerber C, Fuchs B, Hodler J (2000) The results of repair of massive tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82(4):505–515

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Grasso A, Milano G, Salvatore M, Falcone G, Deriu L, Fabbriciani C (2009) Single-row versus double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a prospective randomized clinical study. Arthroscopy 25(1):4–12. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2008.09.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Huijsmans PE, Pritchard MP, Berghs BM, van Rooyen KS, Wallace AL, de Beer JF (2007) Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(6):1248–1257. doi:10.2106/JBJS.E.00743

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim DH, ElAttrache NS, Tibone JE et al (2006) Biomechanical comparison of a single-row versus double-row suture anchor technique for rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 34(3):407–414. doi:10.1177/0363546505281238

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Koh K, Kang KC, Lim TK, Shon MS, Yoo JC (2011) Prospective randomized clinical trial of single- versus double-row suture anchor repair in 2- to 4-cm rotator cuff tears: clinical and magnetic resonance imaging results. Arthroscopy 27(4):453–462

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lafosse L, Brozska R, Toussaint B, Gobezie R (2007) The outcome and structural integrity of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with use of the double-row suture anchor technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:1533–1541

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lo IK, Burkhart SS (2003) Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: re-establishing the footprint of the rotator cuff. Arthroscopy 19:1035–1042

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Meier SW, Meier JD (2006) The effect of double-row fixation on initial repair strength in rotator cuff repair: a biomechanical study. Arthroscopy 22(11):1168–1173. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2006.07.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Papalia R, Franceschi F, Del Buono A, Zampogna B, Malffulli N, Denaro V (2011) Double row repair: is it worth the hassle? Sports Med Arthrosc 19(4):342–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Park MC, ElAttrache NS, Tibone JE, Ahmad CS, Jun BJ, Lee TQ (2007) Part I: footprint contact characteristics for a transosseous-equivalent rotator cuff repair technique compared with a double-row repair technique. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16:461–468. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2006.09.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Park JY, Lhee SH, Choi JH, Park HK, Yu JW, Seo JB (2008) Comparison of the clinical outcomes of single- and double-row repairs in rotator cuff tears. Am J Sports Med 36:1310–1316. doi:10.1177/0363546508315039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Park MC, Tibone JE, ElAttrache NS, Ahmad CS, Jun BJ, Lee TQ (2007) Part II: biomechanical assessment for a footprint-restoring transosseous-equivalent rotator cuff repair technique compared with double-row repair technique. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16(4):469–476. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2006.09.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pennington WT, Gibbons DJ, Bartz BA, Dodd M, Daun J, Klinger J, Popovich M, Butler B (2010) Comparative analysis of single-row versus double-row repair of rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy 26(11):1419–1426

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Reardon DJ, Maffulli N (2007) Clinical evidence shows no difference between single- and double-row repair for rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy 23(6):670–673. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2007.01.031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Smith CD, Alexander S, Hill AM et al (2006) A biomechanical comparison of single and double-row fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88(11):2425–2431. doi:10.2106/JBJS.E.00697

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sugaya H, Maeda K, Matsuki K, Moriishi J (2007) Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair: a prospective outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:953–960. doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sugaya H, Maeda K, Matsuki K, Moriishi J (2005) Functional and structural outcome after arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair: single-row versus dual-row fixation. Arthroscopy 21(11):1307–1316. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2005.08.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. H.U. Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain

    Ignacio Carbonel, Angel Antonio Martinez, Angel Calvo, Jorge Ripalda & Antonio Herrera

Authors
  1. Ignacio Carbonel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Angel Antonio Martinez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Angel Calvo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jorge Ripalda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Antonio Herrera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ignacio Carbonel.

Additional information

Level of evidence: Level I.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carbonel, I., Martinez, A.A., Calvo, A. et al. Single-row versus double-row arthroscopic repair in the treatment of rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomized clinical study. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 36, 1877–1883 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1559-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1559-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation