Abstract
-
Injuries to the rotator cuff (RC) are common and could alter shoulder kinematics leading to arthritis. Synthetic and biological scaffolds are increasingly being used to bridge gaps, augment RC repair and enhance healing potential. Our review evaluates the clinical applications, safety and outcome following the use of scaffolds in massive RC repair.
-
A search was performed using EBSCO-Hosted Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane and PubMed using various combinations of the keywords ‘rotator cuff’, ‘scaffold’, ‘biological scaffold’, ‘massive rotator cuff tear’ ‘superior capsular reconstruction’ and ‘synthetic scaffold’ between 1966 and April 2018. The studies that were most relevant to the research question were selected. All articles relevant to the subject were retrieved, and their bibliographies hand searched.
-
Synthetic, biosynthetic and biological scaffolds are increasingly being used for the repair/reconstruction of the rotator cuff. Allografts and synthetic grafts have revealed more promising biomechanical and early clinical results than xenografts. The retear rates and local inflammatory reactions were alarmingly high in earlier xenografts. However, this trend has reduced considerably with newer versions. Synthetic patches have shown lower retear rates and better functional outcome than xenografts and control groups.
-
The use of scaffolds in the treatment of rotator cuff tear continues to progress. Analysis of the current literature supports the use of allografts and synthetic grafts in the repair of massive cuff tears in reducing the retear rate and to provide good functional outcome. Though earlier xenografts have been fraught with complications, results from newer ones are promising. Prospective randomized controlled trials from independent centres are needed before widespread use can be recommended.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:557-566. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180040
Introduction
The rotator cuff (RC) plays a significant role in shoulder biomechanics and is predisposed to injury and degenerative changes because of its location and blood supply. 1 The prevalence of RC tears is 34% in the general population and is more prevalent in the elderly population (54% in those > 60 years of age). 2,3 A study on the natural history of RC tears has shown that asymptomatic rotator cuff tears will become symptomatic and that the size of the tear will progress with time. 4 Massive RC tears could alter glenohumeral kinematics leading to humeral head migration, cuff tear arthropathy and pseudo paralysis of the shoulder. 4,5 Surgical management of massive cuff tear is challenging and the re-rupture rate has been reported in the literature as between 11% 6 and 94%. 7
To reconstruct the RC and to optimize tendon healing, various scaffolds have been in use (Table 1). Though outcomes following the use of biological 8,9 and synthetic scaffolds 10,11 were encouraging in preclinical studies, the results were not replicated in human studies. 12–15 In spite of the growing clinical use of scaffold devices for tendon repair, there are numerous questions related to their design, indication for surgical applications, safety, mechanism of action, and outcomes that remain to be clarified or addressed. The aim of this review is to investigate the current state of knowledge in the field of biomaterials for augmentation and/or repair of the rotator cuff.
Commercially available scaffolds for rotator cuff repair
| Scaffold |
Supplier |
Composition |
|---|---|---|
| Synthetic | ||
| X-Repair | Synthasome (San Diego, CA, USA) | Poly-L-lactic-acid |
| LARS Ligament | LARS (Arc-sur-Tille, Burgundy, France) Dacron Xiros (Leeds, UK) |
Polyethylene Terephthalate |
| Poly-Tape | Neoligaments (Leeds, UK) | Polyethylene Terephthalate |
| Mersilene mesh | Ethicon, Inc. (Somerville, NJ) | Polyethylene Terephthalate |
| Integraft | Hexcel Medical (Dublin, CA) | Carbon fibre tow |
| Teflon | Dupont Company (Wilmington, DE) | Polytetrafluoroethylene |
| Marlex | C.R. Bard (Mullayhill, NJ) | High-density polyethylene |
| Repol Angimesh | ANGIOLOGICA BM Srl (Pavia, Italy) | Polypropylene |
| BioFiber | Tornier (Edina, MN) | Poly (4-hydroxybutyrate) |
| Biosynthetic |
||
| BioFiber-CM |
Tornier (Edina, MN) |
Poly (4-hydroxybutyrate) + bovine collagen |
| Biological | ||
| Restore | Depuy (Warsaw, IN) | Porcine small intestine submucosa |
| Zimmer Collagen Repair Patch | Zimmer (Warsaw, IN) | Porcine dermis |
| Conexa | Tornier (Edina, MN) | Porcine dermis |
| Biotape | Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (Arlington, IN) | Porcine dermis |
| Permacol | Medtronics (Mansfield MA) | Porcine dermis |
| OrthoADAPT | Pegasus Biologics, Inc. (Irvine, CA) | Native equine pericardium |
| BioBlanket | Kensey Nash Corporation (Exton, PA) | Bovine dermis |
| Tutopatch | Tuto-gen Medical GmbH (Neunkirchen am Brand, Germany) | Bovine pericardium |
| Tissue Mend | Stryker Orthopedics (Mahwah, NJ) | Foetal bovine dermis |
| GraftJacket | Wright Medical Technology (Arlington, TN) | Human dermis |
| Allopatch HD | MTF Sports Medicine (Edison, NJ) | Human dermis |
| Arthroflex | Arthrex (LifeNet Health, Virginia Beach, VA) | Human dermis |
Materials and methods
A comprehensive search was performed using EBSCO Hosted Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane and PubMed between 1966 and April 2018, using various combinations of the keywords ‘rotator cuff’, ‘scaffold’, ‘biological scaffold’, ‘massive rotator cuff tear’, ‘superior capsular reconstruction’ and ‘synthetic scaffold’ over the years. The studies that were most relevant to the research question were selected. All articles relevant to the subject were retrieved, and their bibliographies hand searched for further references in the context of biomaterials for repair of the rotator cuff. The search was limited to articles in English (including the articles where an English translation was available), which had been peer reviewed. Grey literature was searched on the internet and the System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (SIGLE). Strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were followed (Table 2) in including the study for review.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
| Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria |
|---|---|
| Massive rotator cuff tear Synthetic and/or biological scaffolds Rotator cuff repair using scaffolds – augmentation and bridging Clinical studies in human beings |
Tendinopathy/other disorders with intact tendon or ligament Expert opinion, letter to editors, case reports and literature review Experimental studies on animals Non-anatomical rotator cuff repair/reconstruction – superior capsular reconstruction, tendon transfers, balloon spacers etc. |
Results
In the literature search 8607 studies were identified related to rotator cuff injuries, of which 145 were related to the use of biological/synthetic scaffolds in the repair of torn rotator cuffs. Of the 145 studies, 30 were related to the use of biological scaffolds, one compared biological and synthetic, and the remainder were related to the use of synthetic scaffolds. After applying strict inclusion and exclusion criteria to the selected studies, 27 studies (18 biological; eight synthetic; one biological versus synthetic) were selected for the review (Fig. 1).
Biological scaffolds
Numerous studies have been published in the literature describing the role of biological scaffolds (Table 3) in the treatment of rotator cuff injuries in humans, the results are less promising than those of animal studies.
Biological scaffolds used in rotator cuff repair
| Study, year | Scaffold used | Technique * | Sample size/follow-up | Outcome | Adverse events |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Xenografts | |||||
| Metcalf et al, 2002 17 | Restore | Open augmentation |
12/24 months | UCLA score improved from 9.9 to 19.9 (P < .01) | No complications |
| MRI scan at 2 years – 11 incorporation with thick tendon, one complete resorption of graft | |||||
| Sclamberg et al, 2004 15 | Restore | Open bridging and augmentation |
11/6–10 months | ASES score improved from 60.3 to 58.4 (P = –0.7) | No complications |
| MRI scan – retears in 10/11 patients | |||||
| Iannotti et al, 2006 13 | Restore | Open augmentation |
Augmented (A) 15, Non-augmented (NA) 15/12–26 months | PENN score 83 points in augmented and 91 in non-augmented group (P = –0.07) | Three patients in augmentation group developed erythema, swelling and discharge |
| MRA four out of 15 healed in augmented group; nine out of 15 healed in NA group | |||||
| Malcarney et al, 2005 12 | Restore | Open bridging and augmentation |
25 | RCT aborted because of serious postoperative complications | Four patients developed overt inflammatory reaction in a mean of 13 days postoperatively. |
| Walton et al, 2007 18 | Restore | Open bridging and augmentation |
A 15, NA 16/25 months | Mean activity pain score 9.9 augmented vs. 4 control (P < 0.01). Augmented group had less strength in internal rotation (P < 0.01), less supraspinatus strength (P < 0.1) and exhibited more impingement symptoms in external rotation (P < 0.05) | Four patients with severe inflammatory reaction that required reoperation and removal of xenograft in the early postoperative period |
| MRI – 6 out of 10 in augmented and 7 out of 12 in control group had retorn the tendons. | |||||
| Phipatanakul and Petersen, 2009 14 | Restore | Open bridging and augmentation | 11/26 months | Mean UCLA and ASES scores improved from 13.9 and 36.3 to 25.7 and 71.8 postoperatively (P < .01) | One infection and two local skin reactions |
| MRA (8)/ surgery (1) – 6 failed to repair | |||||
| Soler et al, 2007 21 | Zimmer Collagen Repair Patch | Mini-open bridging |
4/3–6 months | Early failure in all four cases | Florid inflammatory reaction and two cases ended up with reverse total shoulder replacement |
| MRI – all four failed with extensive inflammatory reaction | |||||
| Badhe et al, 2008 22 | Zimmer Collagen Repair Patch | Mini-open bridging |
10/12 months | Constant–Murley score improved from 41 to 62 (P = .0003), pain, abduction power and range of movement improved postoperatively (P < .05) | No complications |
| USS and MRI – two failures out of ten | |||||
| Gupta et al, 2013 24 | Conexa | Mini-open bridging |
26/24–40 months | Mean ASES improved from 62.7 to 91.8 (P = .0007) and SF-12 scores improved from 48.4 to 56.6 (P = .044) |
No complications |
| USS – 16 intact, five partially intact, one complete tear | |||||
| Neumann et al, 2017 23 | Conexa | Mini-open bridging |
61/24–63 months | Pain score decreased from 4.0 to 1.0 (P = .001), Forward flexion, external/internal rotation and strength of supra and infraspinatus significantly increased postoperatively (P < .001) | No complications |
| USS – 56 intact, two partially intact and three completely torn | |||||
| Allograft | |||||
| Burkhead et al, 2007 27 | GraftJacket | Open augmented |
17/14 months | UCLA scores improved from 9.06 to 26.12 (P < .001), MRI (11)/CT arthrogram (1) – three failures to repair |
No complications |
| Bond et al, 2008 28 | GraftJacket | Arthroscopic bridging |
16/12–18 months | UCLA score increased from 18.4 to 30.4 (P = .0001), Constant–Murley score increased from 53.8 to 84.0 (P = .0001). | No complications |
| MRI scans 13 patients had full incorporation of graft | |||||
| Wong et al, 2010 29 | GraftJacket | Arthroscopic bridging |
45/24–68 months | UCLA score increased from 18.4 to 27.5 (P < .001); final follow-up ASES score was 84.1. | Deep wound infection in an immunocompromized patient |
| No radiological evaluation | |||||
| Barber et al, 2012 30 | GraftJacket | Arthroscopic augmentation |
A 22, NA 20/12–38 months | ASES (P = .035), Constant–Murley score (P = .008), UCLA score (P = .43) significantly better in augmented group | Augmented – one bursitis; NA – cellulitis (2); bursitis (1); post-traumatic fibrosis (1); Biceps tendon rupture (1) |
| MRI – intact cuff in 17 out of 20 in augmented group and six out of 15 in non-augmented group | |||||
| Gupta et al, 2012 31 |
GraftJacket | Mini-open bridging |
24/29–40 months | Mean ASES improved from 66.6 to 88.7 (P = .0003) and SF-12 scores improved from 48.8 to 56.8 (P = .03) |
No complications |
| USS (19) – 14 fully intact, 5 partially intact | |||||
| Pandey et al, 2017 32 | GraftJacket | Mini-open bridging vs. partial repair |
13 each arm/2 years | Constant–Murley score increased from 41.2 to 83.9 in allograft group vs. 43.1 to 70.8 in partial repair group, OSS increased from 14.9 to 43.9 in allograft group vs. 17.8 to 37.1 in partial repair group. The allograft group showed greater significant improvement than the partial repair group (P < .01) | No complications |
| USS – retear four patients | |||||
| Sharma et al, 2018 33 | GraftJacket | Mini-open bridging |
22 (two single layers of Graft Jacket)/ 18–24 months |
OSS improved from 22 to 45.5 (P = 0.00148), 95% patients would recommend the surgery to their family or friends | One frozen shoulder and another patient with persistent pain ended up with two arthroscopies and finally a reverse total shoulder replacement |
| No radiological assessment | |||||
| Agrawal, 2012 34 | Allopatch HD | Arthroscopic augmentation |
14/12–24 months | Constant–Murley score increased from 49.72 to 81.07 (P = .009). Pain score improved from 13.57 to 7.73 (P = .008). Flexilevel Scale of shoulder function improved from 53.69 to 79.71 | No complications |
| MRI – 12 structurally intact, two partial tears | |||||
Note. UCLA, University of California, Los Angeles Score; ASES, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon; MRA, ; OSS, Oxford Shoulder Score; PENN, ; RCT, randomized controlled trial; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; USS, ; CT, computed tomography.
Arthroscopic vs. open; augmentation vs. bridging gap.
Xenografts
Porcine small intestine submucosa – Restore graft (Depuy, Warsaw, IN)
This graft is a circular implant consisting of ten non-cross-linked layers of porcine small intestine submucosa (SIS), 0.8 mm to 1.0 mm thick and with a diameter of 63 mm. 16 It is more than 90% collagen with approximately 5% to 10% lipids and a small amount of carbohydrate. The layers are obtained from specific pathogen-free swine. The inner mucosa and muscular layers are manually removed. Individual sheets are then cleansed and disinfected with peracetic acid and ethanol, and do not contain viable cells. Ten individual layers are oriented at approximately 20° relative to each other and laminated together under a vacuum press to produce a 1-mm-thick isotropic graft with sufficient strength and mechanical properties. Electron beam sterilization is performed after packaging. Each lot is tested for bacterial endotoxins and mechanical strength. The implant is packaged dry and requires soaking for 5 min to 10 min before use. 16
Metcalf et al 17 first reported the use of Restore SIS as an augmentation device in the repair of the rotator cuff. In their study, 12 patients underwent repair of their massive chronic rotator cuff tear using Restore graft. At a two-year follow-up using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, graft incorporation was found in 11 patients. In one of the 12 patients, mechanical failure was observed within 12 weeks with complete resorption of the graft. In their study there was no evidence of local or systemic rejection or infection in any patient. The mean postoperative University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score was 19.9 on a scale of 1–35; a significant improvement (P < .01) over the preoperative score (9.9). However, shoulder function remained below normal in these patients. This study established improved postoperative outcomes for patients managed with Restore graft augmentation compared with their preoperative condition. However, the lack of a control group in his study makes it difficult to conclude that the functional improvements in the study were the result of augmentation.
Sclamberg et al 15 evaluated 11 patients both clinically and with MRI at six to ten months after repair of large or massive rotator cuff tears augmented with Restore. MRI showed a retear in ten of the 11 patients. Though the pain improved in seven out of the 11 patients, there was no increase in the range of motion. The preoperative and postoperative shoulder scores were the same and the function did not improve after surgery.
The only prospective randomized controlled study that compared Restore graft augmentation and no augmentation was performed by Iannotti et al. 13 In this study they randomized 30 shoulders with chronic two-tendon rotator cuff tears (nine with large tears and 21 with massive tears of the rotator cuff) that were completely repairable with open surgery to be managed with either augmentation with porcine SIS or no augmentation. The rotator cuff healed in four of the 15 shoulders in the augmentation group compared with nine of the 15 in the control group (P = 0.11). The authors concluded that augmentation of the surgical repair of large and massive chronic rotator cuff tears with porcine SIS did not improve the rate of tendon healing or the clinical outcome scores. On the basis of their investigation, the authors do not recommend using porcine SIS to augment repairs of massive chronic rotator cuff tears performed with the surgical and postoperative procedures described in their study.
A study by Malcarney et al 12 on 25 patients using the Restore graft showed severe postoperative inflammatory reaction in four out of 25 patients. At a mean of 13 days all the four patients had open debridement and failure of repair is also noted. Though this study was designed as a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT), it was aborted because of this complication. Walton et al 18 followed up ten tendons repaired with Restore and compared 12 tendons repaired without augmentation by the same surgeon. The groups were matched for gender, mean age, and mean size of the rotator cuff tear. MRI at two years showed retears in six of the ten tendons repaired with Restore and in seven of the 12 non-augmented tendons. Interestingly the patients with augmentation had less strength than the controls and had more impingement in external rotation, a slower rate of resolution of pain during activities, more difficulty with hand behind the back activities, and a lower rate of sports participation.
This material is now not used in Europe for rotator cuff repairs. In the USA, though the FDA has initially approved the material for clinical use, the use of this implant was stopped due to serious adverse effects 12,13,18 and is not recommended by American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). 19
Acellular porcine dermis marketed as Permacol (Tissue Science Laboratories, Covington, GA, USA), Zimmer Collagen Repair Patch (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA), and Conexa (Tornier, Inc., Edina, MN, USA).
Acellular porcine dermis is a cross-linked collagen sheet of 1.5 mm thickness. 20 The graft is processed in various stages to make it acellular, and the graft is cross-linked with hexamethylene diisocyanate. The patch is hydrated and could be stored at room temperature.
Soler et al 21 used the Zimmer Collagen Repair Patch as a bridging device to repair massive rotator cuff tears in four older patients (aged 71 years to 82 years). At between three and six months postoperatively, the graft began to fail and the patients showed signs and symptoms of re-rupture, with signs of inflammation. MRI scans showed inflammatory changes, resorption of the graft, fluid pooling in the sub-deltoid bursa and loss of continuity of the remaining graft material. Histology of the tissues retrieved revealed necrotic fibrinous material on a background of chronic inflammation.
Badhe et al 22 prospectively evaluated ten patients with extensive rotator cuff tears treated with the Zimmer Collagen Repair Patch. All patients experienced significant pain relief, and improvement in abduction power and range of motion. Nine out of ten patients were happy with the outcome after surgery. Ultrasound imaging at the final follow-up identified intact grafts in eight and disrupted grafts in two patients. A recent study by Neumann et al 23 utilizing Conexa showed promising results at a mean follow-up of 50.3 months (range, 24 months to 63 months). Ultrasound evaluation demonstrated intact repair in 91.8% (56 of 61) of the patients. In addition, the patients had significant improvement in their pain score from 4 to 1 (P < .001), range of motion – forward flexion from 140.7° to 160.4° (P < .001), external rotation at 0° of abduction from 55.6° to 70.1° (P = .001), and internal rotation at 90° of abduction from 52.0° to 76.2° (P < .001) – supraspinatus strength increased from 7.7 to 8.8 (P < .001) and infraspinatus strength increased from 7.7 to 9.3 ( P < .001) and the average Modified American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score postoperatively was 87.8. In both the studies the authors suggested the possibility of cellular contaminants in the earlier xenografts causing tissue reactions. Similar results with good functional outcome were reported by Gupta et al 24 and Giannotti et al. 25
Allografts
GraftJacket (Wright Medical Technology, Inc., Arlington, Tennessee) is a commercially available acellular dermal matrix obtained from tissue-bank human skin. 26 The skin is processed with a patented technique that removes epidermal and dermal cells, and it is then freeze dried to avoid the formation of ice crystals and to retain the native extracellular architecture and vascular channels. As it is rendered acellular during processing, it lacks many of the disadvantages typical of standard allograft tissue. The resulting patch is an acellular tissue, made of collagen types I, III, IV, VII, elastin, chondroitin sulphate, proteoglycans, and fibroblast growth factor. This graft has an intact basement membrane complex and preserved vascular channels to allow rapid infiltration of fibroblasts and vascular tissue, with minimal host inflammatory response. 16 It is recommended for tendon repairs, ligament augmentation, capsular reinforcement and periosteal covering. It is commercially available in several forms. With an average thickness of 1.0 mm, it is available in 5 cm by 5 cm and 5 cm by 10 cm sheets. With an average thickness of 1.5 mm, it is available in 4 cm by 7 cm or 5 cm by 5 cm sizes. With an average thickness of 2.0 mm, it is available in a 4 cm by 7 cm size. It is packaged dry. Before use, the GraftJacket needs to be hydrated for at least 10 min to 15 min. 16
Burkhead et al 27 used GraftJacket allografts for the augmentation of massive rotator cuff tears in 17 patients. At a mean follow-up of 24 months three out of 17 failed; however, the tear sizes were smaller than in the preoperative MRIs. UCLA scores improved from 9.06 to 26.12 (P < .01). There were no adverse events and the range of movements improved postoperatively.
Bond et al 28 treated 16 patients with massive, contracted, immobile rotator cuff tears with arthroscopic implantation of a GraftJacket allograft. At mean follow-up of 26.7 months, 15 of 16 patients were satisfied with the procedure. The mean UCLA score increased from 18.4 preoperatively to 30.4 postoperatively. The mean pain score improved from 4.6 to 9.8 postoperatively. The mean Constant–Murley score increased from 53.8 to 84.0 (P = .0001); improvements were noted in pain, forward flexion and external rotation strength. MRI scans showed full incorporation of the graft into the native tissue in 13 patients. There were no complications related to the use of the grafts. The study by Bond et al 28 was updated by Wong et al 29 in 2010. Forty-five patients who had GraftJacket allografts were followed up for 24 months to 68 months and the preoperative UCLA scores improved from 18.4 to 27.5 (P < .0001). Except for a deep wound infection in an immunocompromised patient, no other major complications were reported.
A prospective randomized controlled trial by Barber et al, compared the use of GraftJacket for augmentation (Group 1) of chronic two-tendon tears versus no augmentation (Group 2). 30 There were 22 patients in Group 1 and 20 in Group 2, with a mean age of 56 years. At a mean follow-up of 24 months (range, 12 to 38 months) the ASES (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons) score improved from 48.5 to 98.9 in Group 1 and from 46.0 to 94.8 in Group 2. The scores in Group 1 were statistically better than those in group 2 (P = .035). The Constant–Murley score improved from 41.0 to 91.9 in Group 1 and from 45.8 to 85.3 in Group 2. The scores in Group 1 were statistically better than those in Group 2 (P = .008). The UCLA score improved from 13.3 to 28.2 in Group 1 and from 15.9 to 28.3 in Group 2 (P = .43). The repairs were found intact in 85% of the augmented group in comparison to the 40% of the non-augmented group by gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance arthrogram at one or two years of follow-up (P < .01). No adverse events related to the GraftJacket were observed. The results show significantly better functional outcome and a significantly better healing rate in patients with augments compared with non-augmented rotator cuff repairs. These studies support further investigation of non-cross-linked dermis scaffolds for the treatment of rotator cuff tears. Similar results with no major complications were replicated in a study by Gupta et al. 31 In their study at an average follow-up of three years, the mean pain level reduced from 5.4 to 0.9 (P = .0002), mean ASES and SF-12 scores improved from 66.6 to 88.7 (P = .0003) and 48.8 to 56.8 (P = .03) respectively. Besides this, ultrasound scans revealed fully intact rotator cuffs in 76% of the patients. Pandey et al compared the outcome between 13 patients who had partial cuff repair and 13 patients with partial repair and gap bridged with a GraftJacket. 32 At a minimum follow-up of two years, Constant–Murley score increased from preoperative scores by 27.7 points in the partial repair group and 42.8 points in the GraftJacket group (P < 0.01). The Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) also improved by 19.3 points in the partial repair group and 29 points in the GraftJacket group (P < 0.02). Ultrasound scan (USS) evaluation at two years showed a 30% (four patients) retear rate. Sharma et al utilized GraftJacket to bridge the gap in massive cuff tear repairs in 20 patients. 33 At a follow-up of 18 months to 24 months, the OSS improved from 22.0 to 45.5 (P = 0.00148). The authors did not evaluate the integrity of repair radiologically.
Tissuemend HD (human dermis) was used in 14 patients with recurrent massive cuff tears. 34 Follow-up evaluation with MRI between one and two years demonstrated complete healing in 85.7% of the patients. All the patients in this study had significant improvement in Constant–Murley scores from 49.72 (range 13–74) to 81.07 (range 45–92) postoperatively (P = 0.009), the Flexilevel Scale of Shoulder Function improved from a preoperative mean of 53.69 to a postoperative mean of 79.71 (P = 0.003), scapular plane abduction improved from a preoperative mean of 113.64° to 166.43° postoperatively (P = 0.010), pain score improved from a preoperative mean of 7.73 to 13.57 postoperatively (P = 0.008) and strength improved from a mean of 1.73 kg preoperatively to a mean of 7.52 kg postoperatively (P = 0.006).
Synthetic scaffolds
Encalada-Diaz et al 35 evaluated the Biomerix RCR Patch made of polycarbonate polyurethane, as an augmentation device in open repair of full thickness rotator cuff tears. Ten patients with a mean tear size of 20 mm (supraspinatus or infraspinatus tendon) had the surgery. At the one-year follow-up, significant improvement in outcome scores was reported, with ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging demonstrating a 10% failure rate. Again, as with other studies, the lack of a control group for comparison makes it difficult to determine the precise benefit of the graft, particularly in limiting repair failures. The authors also acknowledge that the mean tear size in the series represents a small- to medium-sized tear, which may not necessitate repair augmentation as commonly as a large or massive tear.
The other synthetic material utilized for rotator cuff repair is Gore-Tex patch WL (Gore-Tex Soft-Tissue Patch (Gore-Tex, W. L. Gore & Assoc. Inc., Flagstaff, Arizona). It is composed of the inert biomaterial polytetrafluoroethylene. 36 It features a microporous structure allowing for host tissue incorporation. It is elastic and resembles a dense sponge rubber. Hirooka et al 37 in a retrospective clinical study evaluated the functional outcome after using Gore-Tex patches in 28 patients with rotator cuff tears. In a mean follow-up of 72 months good improvements in pain relief, range of motion and muscle strength were noted. However, three of the 28 patients needed revision surgeries for recurrent tear. Audenaert et al 38 used Mersilene mesh (polyethylene terephthalate), in 41 patients, the preoperative Constant–Murley score improved significantly from an average of 25.7 to 72.1 (P < 0.001). In addition, 74% of the patients had good pain relief and 77% could carry out overhead activities.
Ozaki et al 39 presented the first series of massive cuff lesions treated with polyester grafts (Marlex (CR Bard, Cranston, Rhode Island) and Teflon (CR Bard, Haverhill, Massachusetts; WL Gore, Flagstaff, Arizona)) in 1986. Although the authors concluded that satisfying results were obtained, no standardized scoring system was utilized to evaluate the patients. Two other studies utilized carbon fibre for reconstruction of the cuff. 40,41 This use was discontinued due to potential problems with fragmentation and reactive synovitis.
A recent study by Nada et al 42 showed promising results at a follow-up of 36 months following RC repair using LARS Ligament. All their patients had significant improvement in pain, function and range of motion (P < 0.001). MRI scans at final follow-up confirmed intact tendon/bands in 15 out of 17 patients. Ciampi et al 43 compared the functional outcome and structural integrity after cuff repair in 152 patients with posterosuperior massive rotator cuff tears (control group = 51; Tutopatch = 49; polypropylene patch augmentation = 52). Ultrasound assessment at one year showed a retear rate of 41% in the control group, 51% in the Tutopatch group, and 17% in the polypropylene patch augmentation group. At three-year follow-up the polypropylene group had significant better functional outcomes than the control and Tutopatch groups.
Ranebo et al assessed 12 patients at a mean follow-up of 18 years following rotator cuff interposition repair with Dacron (DuPont, Wilmington, DE, USA). 44 The mean Constant–Murley score at a minimum follow-up of 17 years was 46 (SD = 25) and the mean Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index score was 59 (SD = 20). Nine out of 12 patients developed cuff tear arthropathy and three needed arthroplasty.
Discussion
Rotator cuff repair using scaffolds is gradually gaining momentum and its application is expanding. 19,45 The proposed advantages of scaffolds are to improve the biology of repair by providing a scaffold for host tissues to infiltrate and remodel, as well as to reduce the mechanical forces that act at the repair site, to help with tissue healing and to prevent recurrent tears. 19,45
Animal studies using Restore, Zimmer Collagen Repair and GraftJacket have shown positive outcomes with good host tissue integration, remodelling and improvement in biomechanical properties. 46–48 Besides, these studies did not show any tissue rejection or adverse host tissue response. Though similar results were found for synthetic scaffolds, these were not replicated in clinical studies. 19 The disadvantage with animal models are that the injuries are acute, unlike in humans where the cuff tears are chronic and postoperative restrictions and therapy are not possible in the animal model. 11
Porcine small intestine submucosa was the earliest biological scaffold that was used in rotator cuff repair. Promising results from animal studies were not replicated in humans, with some studies exposing the increased re-rupture after repair and tissue oedema due to host tissue response. 13,15,18 Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) analysis of the Restore graft demonstrated residual porcine DNA, and implantation in mice and rabbits confirmed host tissue response in the form of inflammatory changes and lymphocyte infiltration. 49 This is in contrast to earlier studies where the Restore graft was considered as a scaffold devoid of cells. 17 The earlier studies advised against using Restore for rotator cuff repair due to poor functional outcomes and serious complications. 12,13,18
Zimmer Collagen Repair Patch (porcine dermis) has mixed results, with a study reporting serious complications. 20 All four patients in this study experienced failure of graft and significant host tissue response. A similar report finding was reported following the use of Zimmer Collagen Repair Patch after trapeziectomy. 50 Recent studies did show promising results, probably following improvement in the graft properties by making it DNA free. 21,24 Currently there are no randomized controlled trials to evaluate the safety of this scaffold and further clinical trials are needed before its widespread use. 20,21,50
However, with the newer porcine dermal xenografts (Conexa), the results are promising; with newer technologies the matrix is made acellular without porcine DNA. In these studies the results are comparable to human acellular dermal matrix. 23,24 In the current literature there were no clinical studies evaluating functional outcome of Tissue Mend (foetal bovine dermis) or OrthADAPT (equine pericardium).
Studies have consistently shown promising results for the use of GraftJacket for rotator cuff repair. 28–34 Unlike other biological scaffolds, no serious host tissue response has been reported. Besides, GraftJacket has better mechanical properties that other biological scaffolds. 51
The ultimate strain of a normal rotator cuff is 1978 +/- 301 N 52 and the same in available scaffolds are GraftJacket (229 N), Zimmer Patch (128 N), Tissue Mend (76 N), and Restore (38 N). 51 Though the synthetic scaffolds have a higher mean load to failure (Leeds-Keio Ligament, 780 +/- 200 N and LARS Ligament, 998 +/- 148 N), they are still below the ultimate strain of rotator cuff. 45 The retear rate is proportional to the mechanical strength of the graft. A recent review has shown an overall retear rate of 25% with scaffolds, with xenograft having the highest rate of retear at 44%, followed by allograft (23%) and synthetic graft (15%). 53 The results are similar to our review and the retear rates appear far lower than those of conventional repair methods for massive cuff tears. 6,7
The role of scaffolds is to improve the biological and mechanical properties of repair and to degrade and be replaced by host tissue. Valentin et al 54 have shown that in animals, the Restore patch was completely degraded in around 112 days and the remaining biological scaffolds either partially degrade (GraftJacket, Cuff Patch and Tissue Mend) or do not degrade at all (Zimmer Patch). This is worse with synthetic scaffolds. Studies have shown the presence of scaffolds in knee joints after 15 years and also poor host tissue integration. 55,56 The only exceptions among synthetic scaffolds are made from aliphatic polyesters which do degrade, the remaining do not, irrespective of the time of implantation. 20,45,57 There is a significant gap in the literature about the sequence of events after implantation of scaffolds in the shoulder. Further research is needed to assess healing, scaffold degradation and host tissue response. 58 This will impact on postoperative rehabilitation and will help optimize tissue healing.
Smith et al 59 assessed the mechanical properties of seven commercially available scaffolds for rotator cuff repair and compared those with the supraspinatus tendon. All of them were subjected to scanning electron microscopy, tensile testing, rheometer testing and scanning probe microscopy. The testing showed that none of the available scaffolds have micro or macro mechanical properties similar to the supraspinatus tendon.
Scaffolds do improve the strength of the repair and reduce the retear rate in patients with massive rotator cuff tears. 6,7,53 Though the retear rate is better than for conventional repair, it is still high. Further studies to assess the bone and scaffold junction healing and the role of its use in young active patients are desirable.
Conclusion
Several biological and synthetic scaffolds are available on the market for the repair of massive rotator cuff injuries and their use continues to expand. Rotator cuff reconstruction with human dermal allograft is associated with good functional and structural outcomes. Xenografts have higher retear rates and have shown less improvement in patient-reported outcomes, strength and range of motion than synthetic grafts and allografts. Though the earlier versions of xenografts were associated with severe inflammatory reactions, the recent ones appear safer and have demonstrated radiological and functional outcomes similar to allografts. The synthetic grafts have the lowest retear rates and did not exhibit any tissue reactions or osteolysis. Prospective, randomized controlled trials by independent units comparing the various scaffolds are needed to establish clear recommendations. The incorporation of techniques of tissue engineering, gene therapy and nanotechnology could improve the mechanical properties and biocompatibility of the scaffolds.
Open access
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed.
The authors declares no conflict of interest relevant to this work.
No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.
References
- 2.↑
Tempelhof S , Rupp S , Seil R . Age-related prevalence of rotator cuff tears in asymptomatic shoulders. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1999; 8: 296–299 .
- 3.↑
Sher JS , Uribe JW , Posada A , Murphy BJ , Zlatkin MB . Abnormal findings on magnetic resonance images of asymptomatic shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995; 77: 10–15 .
- 4.↑
Yamaguchi K , Tetro AM , Blam O , Evanoff BA , Teefey SA , Middleton WD . Natural history of asymptomatic rotator cuff tears: a longitudinal analysis of asymptomatic tears detected sonographically. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2001; 10: 199–203 .
- 5.↑
Williams GR Jr , Rockwood CA Jr , Bigliani LU , Iannotti JP , Stanwood W . Rotator cuff tears: why do we repair them? J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86: 2764–2776 .
- 6.↑
Lafosse L , Brozska R , Toussaint B , Gobezie R . The outcome and structural integrity of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with use of the double-row suture anchor technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89: 1533–1541 .
- 7.↑
Galatz LM , Ball CM , Teefey SA , Middleton WD , Yamaguchi K . The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86: 219–224 .
- 8.↑
Cook JL , Fox DB , Kuroki K , Jayo M , De Deyne PG . In vitro and in vivo comparison of five biomaterials used for orthopedic soft tissue augmentation. Am J Vet Res 2008; 69: 148–156 .
- 9.↑
Shea KP , McCarthy MB , Ledgard F , Arciero C , Chowaniec D , Mazzocca AD . Human tendon cell response to 7 commercially available extracellular matrix materials: an in vitro study. Arthroscopy 2010; 26: 1181–1188 .
- 10.↑
Derwin KA , Codsi MJ , Milks RA , Baker AR , McCarron JA , Iannotti JP . Rotator cuff repair augmentation in a canine model with use of a woven poly-L-lactide device. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91: 1159–1171 .
- 11.↑
Derwin KA , Baker AR , Iannotti JP , McCarron JA . Preclinical models for translating regenerative medicine therapies for rotator cuff repair. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 2010; 16: 21–30 .
- 12.↑
Malcarney HL , Bonar F , Murrell GA . Early inflammatory reaction after rotator cuff repair with a porcine small intestine submucosal implant: a report of 4 cases. Am J Sports Med 2005; 33: 907–911 .
- 13.↑
Iannotti JP , Codsi MJ , Kwon YW , Derwin K , Ciccone J , Brems JJ . Porcine small intestine submucosa augmentation of surgical repair of chronic two-tendon rotator cuff tears. A randomized, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 1238–1244 .
- 14.↑
Phipatanakul WP , Petersen SA . Porcine small intestine submucosa xenograft augmentation in repair of massive rotator cuff tears. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2009; 38: 572–575 .
- 15.↑
Sclamberg SG , Tibone JE , Itamura JM , Kasraeian S . Six-month magnetic resonance imaging follow-up of large and massive rotator cuff repairs reinforced with porcine small intestinal submucosa. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2004; 13: 538–541 .
- 16.↑
Coons DA , Alan Barber F . Tendon graft substitutes-rotator cuff patches. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 2006; 14: 185–190 .
- 17.↑
Metcalf MH , Savoie FH III , Kellum B . Surgical technique for xenograft (SIS) augmentation of rotator-cuff repairs. Oper Tech Orthop 2002; 12: 204–208 .
- 18.↑
Walton JR , Bowman NK , Khatib Y , Linklater J , Murrell GA . Restore orthobiologic implant: not recommended for augmentation of rotator cuff repairs. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89: 786–791 .
- 19.↑
American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Optimizing the management of rotator cuff problems: guideline and evidence report, 2010. https://www.aaos.org/research/guidelines/RCP_guideline.pdf (date last accessed 15 February 2019).
- 20.↑
Longo UG , Lamberti A , Maffulli N , Denaro V . Tendon augmentation grafts: a systematic review. Br Med Bull 2010; 94: 165–188 .
- 21.↑
Soler JA , Gidwani S , Curtis MJ . Early complications from the use of porcine dermal collagen implants (Permacol) as bridging constructs in the repair of massive rotator cuff tears. A report of 4 cases. Acta Orthop Belg 2007; 73: 432–436 .
- 22.↑
Badhe SP , Lawrence TM , Smith FD , Lunn PG . An assessment of porcine dermal xenograft as an augmentation graft in the treatment of extensive rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2008; 17: 35S–39S .
- 23.↑
Neumann JA , Zgonis MH & Rickert KD et al. Interposition dermal matrix xenografts: a successful alternative to traditional treatment of massive rotator cuff tears. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45: 1261–1268 .
- 24.↑
Gupta AK , Hug K , Boggess B , Gavigan M , Toth AP . Massive or 2-tendon rotator cuff tears in active patients with minimal glenohumeral arthritis: clinical and radiographic outcomes of reconstruction using dermal tissue matrix xenograft. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41: 872–879 .
- 25.↑
Giannotti S , Ghilardi M & Dell’osso G et al. Study of the porcine dermal collagen repair patch in morpho-functional recovery of the rotator cuff after minimum follow-up of 2.5 years. Surg Technol Int 2014; 24: 348–352 .
- 26.↑
Derwin KA , Baker AR , Spragg RK , Leigh DR , Iannotti JP . Commercial extracellular matrix scaffolds for rotator cuff tendon repair: biomechanical, biochemical, and cellular properties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 2665–2672 .
- 27.↑
Burkhead WZ Jr , Schiffern SC , Krishnan SG . Use of GraftJacket as an augmentation for massive rotator cuff tears. Semin Arthroplasty 2007; 18: 11–18 .
- 28.↑
Bond JL , Dopirak RM , Higgins J , Burns J , Snyder SJ . Arthroscopic replacement of massive, irreparable rotator cuff tears using a GraftJacket allograft: technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy 2008; 24:403–409.e1.
- 29.↑
Wong I , Burns J , Snyder S . Arthroscopic GraftJacket repair of rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19: 104–109 .
- 30.↑
Barber FA , Burns JP , Deutsch A , Labbé MR , Litchfield RB . A prospective, randomized evaluation of acellular human dermal matrix augmentation for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Arthroscopy 2012; 28: 8–15 .
- 31.↑
Gupta AK , Hug K & Berkoff DJ et al. Dermal tissue allograft for the repair of massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40: 141–147 .
- 32.↑
Pandey R , Tafazal S , Shyamsundar S , Modi A , Singh HP . Outcome of partial repair of massive rotator cuff tears with and without human tissue allograft bridging repair. Shoulder Elbow 2017; 9: 23–30 .
- 33.↑
Sharma N , El Refaiy A , Sibly TF . Short-term results of rotator cuff repair using GraftJacket as an interpositional tissue-matched thickness graft. J Orthop 2018; 18;15: 732–735 .
- 34.↑
Agrawal V . Healing rates for challenging rotator cuff tears utilizing an acellular human dermal reinforcement graft. Int J Shoulder Surg 2012; 6: 36–44 .
- 35.↑
Encalada-Diaz I , Cole BJ & Macgillivray JD et al. Rotator cuff repair augmentation using a novel polycarbonate polyurethane patch: preliminary results at 12 months’ follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011; 20: 788–794 .
- 36.↑
Kummer FJ , Iesaka K . The role of graft materials in suture augmentation for tendon repairs and reattachment. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005; 74: 789–791 .
- 37.↑
Hirooka A , Yoneda M & Wakaitani S et al. Augmentation with a Gore-Tex patch for repair of large rotator cuff tears that cannot be sutured. J Orthop Sci 2002; 7: 451–456 .
- 38.↑
Audenaert E , Van Nuffel J , Schepens A , Verhelst M , Verdonk R . Reconstruction of massive rotator cuff lesions with a synthetic interposition graft: a prospective study of 41 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2006; 14: 360–364 .
- 39.↑
Ozaki J , Fujimoto S , Masuhara K , Tamai S , Yoshimoto S . Reconstruction of chronic massive rotator cuff tears with synthetic materials. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1986; 202: 173–183 .
- 40.↑
Post M . Rotator cuff repair with carbon filament: a preliminary report of five cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985; 196: 154–158 .
- 41.↑
Visuri T , Kiviluoto O , Eskelin M . Carbon fiber for repair of the rotator cuff: a 4-year follow-up of 14 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 1991; 62: 356–359 .
- 42.↑
Nada AN , Debnath UK , Robinson DA , Jordan C . Treatment of massive rotator-cuff tears with a polyester ligament (Dacron) augmentation: clinical outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92: 1397–1402 .
- 43.↑
Ciampi P , Scotti C & Nonis A et al. The benefit of synthetic versus biological patch augmentation in the repair of posterosuperior massive rotator cuff tears: a 3-year follow-up study. Am J Sports Med 2014; 42: 1169–1175 .
- 44.↑
Ranebo MC , Björnsson Hallgren HC , Norlin R , Adolfsson LE . Long-term clinical and radiographic outcome of rotator cuff repair with a synthetic interposition graft: a consecutive case series with 17 to 20 years of follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2018; 27: 1622–1628 .
- 45.↑
Chen J , Xu J , Wang A , Zheng M . Scaffolds for tendon and ligament repair: review of the efficacy of commercial products. Expert Rev Med Devices 2009; 6: 61–73 .
- 46.↑
Dejardin LM , Arnoczky SP , Ewers BJ , Haut RC , Clarke RB . Tissue-engineered rotator cuff tendon using porcine small intestine submucosa: histologic and mechanical evaluation in dogs. Am J Sports Med 2001; 29: 175–184 .
- 47.
Adams JE , Zobitz ME , Reach JS Jr , An KN , Steinmann SP . Rotator cuff repair using an acellular dermal matrix graft: an in vivo study in a canine model. Arthroscopy 2006; 22: 700–709 .
- 48.↑
Nicholson GP , Breur GJ , Van Sickle D , Yao JQ , Kim J , Blanchard CR . Evaluation of a cross-linked acellular porcine dermal patch for rotator cuff repair augmentation in an ovine model. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2007; 16: S184–S190 .
- 49.↑
Zheng MH , Chen J , Kirilak Y , Willers C , Xu J , Wood D . Porcine small intestine submucosa (SIS) is not an acellular collagenous matrix and contains porcine DNA: possible implications in human implantation. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005; 73: 61–67 .
- 50.↑
Belcher HJ , Zic R . Adverse effect of porcine collagen interposition after trapeziectomy: a comparative study. J Hand Surg [Br] 2001; 26: 159–164 .
- 51.↑
Barber FA , Herbert MA , Coons DA . Tendon augmentation grafts: biomechanical failure loads and failure patterns. Arthroscopy 2006; 22: 534–538 .
- 52.↑
Nightingale EJ , Allen CP , Sonnabend DH , Goldberg J , Walsh WR . Mechanical properties of the rotator cuff: response to cyclic loading at varying abduction angles. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2003; 11: 389–392 .
- 53.↑
Steinhaus ME , Makhni EC , Cole BJ , Romeo AA , Verma NN . Outcomes after patch use in rotator cuff repair. Arthroscopy 2016; 32: 1676–1690 .
- 54.↑
Valentin JE , Badylak JS , McCabe GP , Badylak SF . Extracellular matrix bioscaffolds for orthopaedic applications: a comparative histologic study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 2673–2686 .
- 55.↑
Debnath UK , Fairclough JA , Williams RL . Long-term local effects of carbon fibre in the knee. Knee 2004; 11: 259–264 .
- 56.↑
Guidoin MF , Marois Y , Bejui J , Poddevin N , King MW , Guidoin R . Analysis of retrieved polymer fiber based replacements for the ACL. Biomaterials 2000; 21: 2461–2474 .
- 57.↑
Anderson JM , Rodriguez A , Chang DT . Foreign body reaction to biomaterials. Semin Immunol 2008; 20: 86–100 .
- 58.↑
Ricchetti ET , Aurora A , Iannotti JP , Derwin KA . Scaffold devices for rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2012; 21: 251–265 .
- 59.↑
Smith RDJ , Zargar N & Brown CP et al. Characterizing the macro and micro mechanical properties of scaffolds for rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2017; 26: 2038–2046 .
