Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Tear Transosseous Repair System: The Sharc-FT Using the Taylor Stitcher

Pellegrini, Andrea; Lunini, Enricomaria; Rebuzzi, Manuela; Verdano, Michele Arcangelo; Baudi, Paolo; Ceccarelli, Francesco

doi:10.1016/j.eats.2015.01.005

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors concluded that the patient satisfaction rate was high, no patients expressed concern about the implant, and the complication rate was very low. 13 In the present study, despite the relatively short follow-up time, our outcomes are concordant with previous reports, and no bone cutting phenomena, impingement with the acromion, or implant failure was noted with this new device. The mean clinical and functional outcomes 16.8 months after surgery showed significant improvements in the Q-DASH and Constant-Murley scores compared to the preoperative status ( p < 0.05).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…In the current study, we used a novel transosseous device supplied with three additional and complementary tools: an inserter, a punch, and a multipurpose tool for fitting/removing the super elastic transosseous needle. 8,13 The punch instead allows a hole to be made where placing the transosseous device. In addition, the super elastic transosseous needle allows for the creation of one or more transosseous tunnels in the lateral entry hole in which the device is entered and one or more medial exit holes adjacent to the footprint field.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All in all, this novel device enables one to perform transosseous repair with a dedicated instrument. 13 Different from other transosseous methods, this present Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery 27 (3) transosseous device has a holed body intended to manage one to four (or more) inner sutures, and its shape was created to maximize the resistance to pull out effect and to prohibit suture-bone interaction. The head preserves superior stability to the system due to the external sutures that achieve a force equilibrium.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This capability allow to obtain a significant decrease in the possibility of repairing failure due to suture bone cut effect. 8,13 In addition to all these, the cost of multiple anchors is high and anchor dislodgement, osteolysis of the greater tuberosity, and impingement of the anchor in abduction of the shoulder joint could occur. 26 On the other hand, the restrictive aspect of conventional transosseous repair is the risk of tearing the cortical part of the lateral border of the tunnel.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Clinical and functional outcomes of a novel transosseous device to treat rotator cuff tears: A minimum 2-year follow-up

Arıcan

Turhan

Karaduman

et al. 2019

J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Despite the improvements in the repair equipment techniques of rotator cuff, a gold standard method has not been defined yet and transosseous fixation through deltoid-splitting (mini-open) approach is still regarded as a good option. The primary purpose of this study is to present satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes with a novel transosseous device in full-thickness rotator cuff tear through deltoid-splitting. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study was performed on 70 consecutive patients who underwent surgery by a single surgeon from June 2014 to June 2016 for a full-thickness rotator cuff tear and was managed with a novel transosseous device. Total number of patients, mean age, percentage of male and female patients, mean duration of follow-up, percentage of involvement of the dominant extremity, affected shoulder, and tear size were recorded. Functional and clinical outcomes were assessed baseline and postoperatively at 3 and 6 months and final follow-up using Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (Q-DASH) and Constant-Murley scores. Results: A total of 70 (49 (70%) female, 21 (30%) male) patients whose mean age was 58.66 ± 9.19 (38–77) years were included. The mean surgery time was 35.33 ± 5.34 (28–55) min. The mean follow-up time was 28.31 ± 3.03 (24–36) months. According to the DeOrio and Cofield classification, 15 (21.43%) tears were small, 33 (47.14%) medium, 16 (22.86%) large, and 6 (8.57%) massive. By the final follow-up, the mean Constant-Murley score had significantly improved from 27.67 ± 7.46 (13–41) to 81.25 ± 3.77 (74–87; p = 0.0001) and the Q-DASH score had decreased from 82.34 ± 10.37 (65.91–100) to 10.28 ± 6.88 (0–23.45; p = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the Constant-Murley or Q-DASH score at baseline–final follow-up between the small, medium, large, and massive tear groups ( p > 0.05). Conclusions: Treatment of full-thickness rotator cuff tear using this novel transosseous device significantly improved functional and clinical scores. However, further long-term prospective randomized multicenter trials involving comparative studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Clinical and functional outcomes of a novel transosseous device to treat rotator cuff tears: A minimum 2-year follow-up

Arıcan

Turhan

Karaduman

et al. 2019

J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, transosseous rotator cuff repair, first described in 1944 by McLaughlin, is considered the gold standard for rotator cuff surgery by many authors. 13,21 Over the past few years, many authors have described slightly differing versions of arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair (ATORCR). 2,7,8,13,14,16,21 This method theoretically represents the best of both worlds, having the advantage of a minimally invasive arthroscopic procedure with the strength and cost-effectiveness of transosseous fixation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal Angle of the Bone Tunnel for Avoiding Axillary Nerve Injuries During Arthroscopic Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging–Based Simulation Study

Gupta

Mishra

Kataria

et al. 2018

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Axillary nerve injury and suture cutout through the roof of the tunnel are potential complications of arthroscopic transosseous rotator cuff repair (ATORCR).Purpose:To determine a safe angle of drilling for the bone tunnel during ATORCR such that the axillary nerve is not at risk. The thickness of the bone bridge over the tunnel for different angles of drilling was also determined.Study Design:Descriptive laboratory study.Methods:The drilling of a straight tunnel was simulated on 30 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in the oblique coronal plane by drawing a straight line that passed at a “safe distance” of 5 mm from the axillary nerve and emerging at the medial border of the insertion of the rotator cuff on the greater tuberosity. The angle made by this line with the horizontal axis of the humerus was measured on 3 MRI sections: anterior (passing just posterior to the lateral lip of the bicipital groove), middle (at the most lateral point of the proximal humerus), and posterior (an equal number of cuts away from the middle section as between anterior and middle). The thickness of the overlying bone roof was measured for this line as well as for simulation lines drawn at 50°, 55°, 60°, and 65° with the horizontal axis. A “safe limit,” defined as the mean – 2SD, was also calculated.Results:The axillary nerve was found to be safe, with a safety margin of 5 mm, at drill angles of less than 61.1° and 60.3° in the posterior and middle sections, respectively. The safe limit value for thickness of the overlying bone roof for the tunnel drilled at 60° was 5.0 mm in the posterior section (mean, 8.2 ± 0.3 mm) and 5.5 mm in the middle section (mean, 8.1 ± 0.2 mm). In the anterior section, the minimum safe angle was 57.7°, and the mean thickness of the bone roof for the 55° angle was 6.3 ± 0.2 mm (safe limit, 3.7 mm).Conclusion:Straight bone tunnels in ATORCR surgery should be drilled at an angle of 60° to the horizontal axis of the humerus or 30° to the humeral shaft to ensure the safety of the axillary nerve while at the same time ensuring adequate thickness of the overlying bone roof. The anterior tunnel close to the bicipital groove should be drilled cautiously at 55° to the horizontal axis or 35° to the humeral shaft.Clinical Relevance:The findings of the present study will help the surgeon choose the best angle for drilling tunnels during ATORCR surgery to avoid axillary nerve injuries as well as suture cut-through without the need for any proprietary device.

show abstract

Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair: Rationale

Chillemi

Castagna

Osimani

2018

Arthroscopic Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Tear Transosseous Repair System: The Sharc-FT Using the Taylor Stitcher

Cited by 9 publications

References 6 publications

Clinical and functional outcomes of a novel transosseous device to treat rotator cuff tears: A minimum 2-year follow-up

Clinical and functional outcomes of a novel transosseous device to treat rotator cuff tears: A minimum 2-year follow-up

Optimal Angle of the Bone Tunnel for Avoiding Axillary Nerve Injuries During Arthroscopic Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging–Based Simulation Study

Transosseous Rotator Cuff Repair: Rationale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About