Search

Rotator cuff (RC) tendinopathy is the most common cause of shoulder pain. The effectiveness of electromagnetic transduction therapy (EMTT), a high energetic pulsed electromagnetic field therapy in this field has not been tested yet in combination with extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT). A total of 86 patients with RC tendinopathy were randomized to undergo three sessions of ESWT in combination with 8 sessions of EMTT or sham-EMTT. Both intervention groups experienced significant and clinical relevant decrease of pain at all follow-up visits, and the functionality of the shoulder evaluated by the Constant Murley score increased significantly as well. The combination of EMTT + ESWT produced significantly greater pain reduction in the visual analogue scale compared to ESWT with sham-EMTT after 24 weeks, during which the Constant Murley score improved significantly when the combination of ESWT and EMTT was employed. In patients with RC tendinopathy, electromagnetic transduction therapy combined with extracorporeal shock wave therapy significantly improves pain and function compared to ESWT with sham-EMTT.

Suture anchors are increasingly gaining importance in rotator cuff surgery. This means they will be gradually replacing transosseous sutures. The purpose of this study was to compare the stability of transosseous sutures with different suture anchors with regard to their pullout strength depending on bone density. By means of bone densitometry (CT scans), two groups of human humeral head specimens were determined: a healthy and a osteopenic bone group. Following anchor systems were being tested: SPIRALOK 5.0 mm (resorbable, DePuy Mitek), Super Revo 5 mm (titanium, Linvatec), UltraSorb (resorbable, Linvatec) and the double U-sutures with Orthocord USP 2 (partly resorbable, DePuy Mitek) and Ethibond Excel 2 (non-resorbable, Ethicon). The suture anchors/double U-sutures were inserted in the greater tuberosity 12 times. An electromechanical testing machine was used for cyclic loading with power increasing in stages. We recorded the ultimate failure loads, the system displacements and the modes of failure. The suture anchors tended to bring about higher ultimate failure loads than the transosseous double U-sutures. This difference was significant in the comparison of the Ethibond suture and the SPIRALOK 5.0 mm-both in healthy and osteopenic bone. Both the suture materials and the SPIRALOK 5.0 mm showed a significant difference in pullout strength on either healthy or osteopenic bone; the titanium anchor SuperRevo 5 mm and the tilting anchor UltraSorb did not show any significant difference in healthy or osteopenic bone. There was no significant difference concerning system displacement (healthy and osteopenic bone) between the five anchor systems tested. The pullout strength of transosseous sutures is neither on healthy nor on osteopenic bone higher than that of suture anchors. Therefore, even osteopenic bone does not constitute a valid reason for the surgeon to perform open surgery by means of transosseous sutures. The choice of sutures in osteopenic bone is of little consequence anyway since it is mostly the bone itself which is the limiting factor.