Cadaveric biomechanical study (9 matched shoulder pairs) comparing an all-suture-anchor double-row footprint repair to a conventional single lateral-row repair of the supraspinatus, using cyclic loading (10–180 N × 200 cycles) and tensile testing to failure to measure gap formation, footprint strain, stiffness, and ultimate failure load.
When planning rotator cuff repair — especially for larger tears where re-tear rates exceed 90% — this study provides the foundational biomechanical rationale for double-row over single-row fixation: if your goal is to minimize early gap formation and maximize initial construct strength, two rows of anchors restoring the native footprint outperform a single lateral row on every measured parameter.
Note that 4-anchor constructs may create stress risers in osteoporotic bone, so consider bone quality when selecting your anchor configuration.
Cadaveric biomechanical study (9 matched shoulder pairs) comparing an all-suture-anchor double-row footprint repair to a conventional single lateral-row repair of the supraspinatus, using cyclic loading (10–180 N × 200 cycles) and tensile testing to failure to measure gap formation, footprint strain, stiffness, and ultimate failure load.
When planning rotator cuff repair — especially for larger tears where re-tear rates exceed 90% — this study provides the foundational biomechanical rationale for double-row over single-row fixation: if your goal is to minimize early gap formation and maximize initial construct strength, two rows of anchors restoring the native footprint outperform a single lateral row on every measured parameter.
Note that 4-anchor constructs may create stress risers in osteoporotic bone, so consider bone quality when selecting your anchor configuration.