ArticleCureus2026
Biomechanical Analysis of Rotator Cuff Repair: Comparison of Sutures and Fixation Techniques in a Synthetic Model.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Irreparable rotator cuff tears represent one of the greatest challenges in contemporary orthopedic surgery, imposing significant functional limitation and requiring reconstruction strategies with high mechanical fixation strength. The choice between different suture materials and anchoring techniques directly influences the initial biomechanical stability of the repair, determining construct safety during the critical period of biological healing. Objective To evaluate and compare the load-to-failure of four tendon repair configurations in humeral head synthetic models (Sawbones®; Pacific Research Laboratories, Inc., Vashon, WA, USA), combining two surgical sutures - Ethibond® USP 5 (Ethicon Inc., Raritan, NJ, USA; braided polyester) and FiberWire® USP 2 (Arthrex Inc., Naples, FL, USA; ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene) - with two fixation techniques: double metal anchor and transosseous tunnel. Methods Linear tensile mechanical tests to failure were performed on 20 shoulder models, with five samples per experimental group. The tendon was simulated using synthetic leather strips (corino), secured with a five-pass epitendinous running suture. Maximum load to failure was measured with a calibrated dynamometer in kilogram-force (kgf) and converted to Newtons (N). Inclusion criteria restricted the analysis to failures exclusive to the suture material, excluding any structural construct failure. Results All configurations exceeded the 200 N biomechanical threshold considered safe for early rehabilitation. The Ethibond® transosseous tunnel group showed the highest mean strength (357.55 N; SD ± 46.7), followed by FiberWire® with double anchor (330.88 N; SD ± 18.3), transosseous FiberWire® (296.36 N; SD ± 8.6), and Ethibond® with double anchor (293.41 N; SD ± 43.9). Between-group Welch's t-tests showed a trend toward higher strength for the Ethibond® transosseous configuration versus Ethibond® double anchor (p = 0.056), and a significant difference between FiberWire® double anchor and FiberWire® transosseous (p = 0.010); pooled main effects of suture material and fixation technique alone were not significant, suggesting an interaction between suture caliber and fixation geometry. Conclusion In this synthetic model, the transosseous technique combined with high-caliber polyester suture produced the greatest mean mechanical strength, although the advantage over anchor fixation did not reach statistical significance. Surgeons may achieve biomechanically safe and cost-effective fixation using transosseous tunnels with Ethibond® USP 5, reserving anchors and FiberWire® for cases in which tear geometry precludes tunnel creation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.