Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2010
Publication Title
Clinical Biomechanics
Abstract
Background
Currently, natural and synthetic scaffolds are being explored as augmentation devices for rotator cuff repair. When used in this manner, these devices are believed to offer some degree of load sharing; however, no studies have quantified this effect. Furthermore, the manner in which loads on an augmented rotator cuff repair are distributed among the various components of the repair is not known, nor is the relative biomechanical importance of each component. The objectives of this study are to (1) develop quasi-static analytical models of simplified rotator cuff repairs, (2) validate the models, and (3) predict the degree of load sharing provided by an augmentation scaffold.
Methods
The individual components of the repair constructs were modeled as non-linear springs, and the model equations were formulated based on the physics of springs in series and parallel. The model was validated and used to predict the degree of load sharing provided by a scaffold. Parametric sensitivity analysis was used to identify which of the component(s)/parameter(s) most influenced the mechanical behavior of the augmented repair models.
Findings
The validated models predict that load will be distributed ∼ 70–80% to the tendon repair and ∼ 20–30% to the augmentation component. The sensitivity analysis suggests that the greatest improvements in the force carrying capacity of a tendon repair may be achieved by improving the properties of the bone–suture–tendon interface. Future studies will perform parametric simulation to illustrate the manner in which changes to the individual components of the repair, representing different surgical techniques and scaffold devices, may influence the biomechanics of the repair construct.
Recommended Citation
Aurora A, Gatica JE, van den Bogert AJ, McCarron JA, Derwin KA. (2010) An analytical model for rotator cuff repairs. Clinical Biomechanics 25(8): 751-758.
DOI
10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.05.010
Version
Postprint
Publisher's Statement
NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Clinical Biomechanics. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Clinical Biomechanics, 25, 8, (01-01-2010); 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.05.010
Volume
25
Issue
8
