The influence of full-thickness supraspinatus tears on abduction moments: the importance of the central tendon

Abstract

Background

Detachment of the central tendon of the supraspinatus from its insertion is considered to be crucial to functional deficit. The aim of the present study was to assess the function of the supraspinatus in terms of abduction moments by introducing different tear configurations to assess the functional effect of the central tendon insertion.

Methods

Ten fresh frozen shoulders from five cadavers were prepared for testing. A testing protocol was established to measure the abduction moment of the supraspinatus under physiological loading tailored to the anthropometrics of each specimen. Four conditions were tested: intact supraspinatus; complete detachment of portion of the supraspinatus tendon anterior to the main central tendon; detachment of the main central tendon; and detachment of the region of the supraspinatus posterior to the main central tendon.

Results

There was a significant and large reduction in abduction moment when the central tendon was sectioned (p < 0.05). A smaller reduction in abduction moment was found when the regions anterior and posterior to the main central tendon were sectioned (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The central tendon is vital in the role of functional arm abduction through force transmission through the intact rotator cuff. Reinsertion of the central tendon in the correct anatomical location is desirable to optimize functional outcome of surgery.

Keywords

biomechanics rotator cuff

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Meyer

Pirkl

Pfirrmann

et al.

Asymmetric atrophy of the supraspinatus muscle following tendon tear. J Orthop Res 2005; 23: 254–258.

Rubino

Stills

Sprott

et al.

Fatty infiltration of the torn rotator cuff worsens over time in a rabbit model. Arthroscopy 2007; 23: 717–722.

Minagawa

Itoi

Konno

et al.

Humeral attachment of the supraspinatus and infraspinatus tendons: an anatomic study. Arthroscopy 1998; 14: 302–306.

Burkhart

Esch

Jolson

. The rotator crescent and rotator cable: an anatomical description of the shoulder’s ‘suspension bridge’. Arthroscopy 1993; 9: 61161–61166.

Mochizuki

Sugaya

Uomizu

et al.

Humeral insertion of the supraspinatus and infraspinatus. New anatomical findings regarding the footprint of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90: 962–969.

Clark

Harryman

. Tendons, ligaments, and capsule of the rotator cuff. Gross and microscopic anatomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1992; 74: 713–725.

Roh

Wang

April

et al.

Anterior and posterior musculotendinous anatomy of the supraspinatus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2000; 9: 436–440.

Escamilla

Yamashiro

Paulos

et al.

Shoulder muscle activity and function in common shoulder rehabilitation exercises. Sports Med 2009; 39: 663–685.

Gates

Gilliland

McGarry

et al.

Influence of distinct anatomic subregions of the supraspinatus on humeral rotation. J Orthop Res 2010; 28: 12–17.

10.

Keating

Waterworth

Shaw-Dunn

et al.

The relative strengths of the rotator cuff muscles. A cadaver study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993; 75: 137–140.

11.

Smith

Alexander

Hill

et al.

A biomechanical comparison of single and double-row fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 2425–2431.

12.

Southgate

DFL

Bokor

Longo

et al.

The effect of humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligaments and humeral repair site on joint laxity: a biomechanical study. Arthroscopy 2013; 29: 990–997.

13.

Bolsterlee

Vardy

van der Helm

et al.

The effect of scaling physiological cross-sectional area on musculoskeletal model predictions. J Biomech 2015; 48: 1760–1768.

14.

Charlton

Johnson

. A model for the prediction of the forces at the glenohumeral joint. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2006; 220: 801–812.

15.

Nakajima

Hughes

. Effects of glenohumeral rotations and translations on supraspinatus tendon morphology. Clin Biomech 2004; 19: 579–585.

16.

Johnson

Spalding

Nowitzke

et al.

Modelling the muscles of the scapula morphometric and coordinate data and functional implications. J Biomech 1996; 29: 1039–1051.

17.

de Leva

. Joint center longitudinal positions computed from a selected subset of Chandler's data. J Biomech 1996; 29: 1231–1233.

18.

de Leva

. Adjustments to Zatsiorsky-Seluyanov's segment inertia parameters. J Biomech 1996; 29: 1223–1230.

19.

Reilly

Macleod

Macfarlane

et al.

Dead men and radiologists don't lie: a review of cadaveric and radiological studies of rotator cuff tear prevalence. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2006; 88: 116–121.

20.

Tanaka

Itoi

Sato

et al.

Factors related to successful outcome of conservative treatment for rotator cuff tears. Ups J Med Sci 2010; 115: 193–200.

21.

Vitale

Zivin

et al.

Rotator cuff repair: an analysis of utility scores and cost-effectiveness. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2007; 16: 181–187.

22.

Cheng

Leung

Chiu

et al.

Can we predict body height from segmental bone length measurements? A study of 3,647 children. J Pediatr Orthop 1998; 18: 387–393.

23.

Thompson

Reilly

Emery

et al.

An anatomical description of the pennation angles and central tendon angle of the supraspinatus both in its normal configuration and with full thickness tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011; 20: 899–903.

24.

Thompson

Reilly

Emery

et al.

Comparison of the degree of retraction of full-thickness supraspinatus tears with the Goutallier grading system. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2012; 21: 749–753.