A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Repair of lesser tuberosity osteotomy for shoulder arthroplasty: biomechanical evaluation of the Backpack and Dual Row techniques. | LitMetric

Background: Subscapularis dysfunction following total shoulder arthroplasty can result in permanent loss of function. The lesser tuberosity osteotomy (LTO) has been proposed as a method which utilizes bone-to-bone healing to improve subscapularis function. This study evaluates the biomechanical properties of two described techniques for LTO repair. We hypothesized that a Dual Row repair would be stronger and demonstrate less cyclic displacement than a Backpack repair.

Materials And Methods: Ten matched pairs of cadaveric humeri were dissected, leaving the subscapularis intact, and a lesser tuberosity osteotomy was performed. Matched shoulders were randomized to either a Backpack repair or a Dual Row repair. Repairs were subjected to cyclic loading to 180 N for 500 cycles, followed by ramp-up loading to ultimate failure. Clinical failure was defined as displacement >5 mm after 500 cycles.

Results: Displacement after 500 cycles was significantly greater for the Backpack repair (6.9 mm) than for the Dual Row repair (4.6 mm) (P = .007). Most displacement occurred on the first cycle (Backpack, 4.6 mm; Dual Row, 2.1 mm) (P < .001). There was a trend toward a higher clinical failure rate for the Backpack repair (8/10) than the Dual Row repair (3/10). Ultimate tensile strength was significantly greater for the Dual Row repair (632.3 N) than for the Backpack repair (510.9 N) (P = .01).

Conclusion: The Dual Row technique is significantly stronger and demonstrates less cyclic displacement than the Backpack technique. Clinical studies are needed to determine the impact of LTO repair technique on subscapularis function following shoulder arthroplasty.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.004DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

dual row
32
row repair
20
backpack repair
16
repair
12
lesser tuberosity
12
tuberosity osteotomy
12
shoulder arthroplasty
12
backpack
8
dual
8
backpack dual
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!