This technical note describes a double-row arthroscopic suture anchor technique for rotator cuff repair. One anchor row sits medially at the articular margin and one laterally at the tuberosity, recreating the native footprint width. It lays out anchor placement, suture passage, and the indications and limits of the technique.
The mental model to carry from this paper: single-row repair fixes the tendon at a point, not across the anatomic footprint, and that undersized contact area is why retear rates ran high. By adding a lateral anchor row, you recreate the medial-to-lateral footprint width and roughly double your fixation points, which lowers the load each anchor and knot must resist.
The decision rule is simple: if the tear reduces to the lateral bone bed with the cuff at rest, it is a candidate. If you have to pull it laterally under tension to reach the second row, stop. Forcing a double-row construct under tension causes tension overload and predictable failure, so mobility, not ambition, dictates the construct.
Note that the healing-rate claims here are drawn from referenced series, not from the authors' own imaged cohort.
This technical note describes a double-row arthroscopic suture anchor technique for rotator cuff repair. One anchor row sits medially at the articular margin and one laterally at the tuberosity, recreating the native footprint width. It lays out anchor placement, suture passage, and the indications and limits of the technique.
The mental model to carry from this paper: single-row repair fixes the tendon at a point, not across the anatomic footprint, and that undersized contact area is why retear rates ran high. By adding a lateral anchor row, you recreate the medial-to-lateral footprint width and roughly double your fixation points, which lowers the load each anchor and knot must resist.
The decision rule is simple: if the tear reduces to the lateral bone bed with the cuff at rest, it is a candidate. If you have to pull it laterally under tension to reach the second row, stop. Forcing a double-row construct under tension causes tension overload and predictable failure, so mobility, not ambition, dictates the construct.
Note that the healing-rate claims here are drawn from referenced series, not from the authors' own imaged cohort.