Abstract
BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic tuberoplasty is an optional technique for managing irreparable rotator cuff tears. However, there is a lack of studies investigating the resistance force during shoulder abduction in cases of irreparable rotator cuff tears and tuberoplasty. HYPOTHESES: In shoulders with irreparable rotator cuff tears, impingement between the greater tuberosity (GT) and acromion increases the resistance force during dynamic shoulder abduction. Tuberoplasty is hypothesized to reduce this resistance force by mitigating impingement. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Eight cadaveric shoulders, with a mean age of 67.75 years (range, 63-72 years), were utilized. The testing sequence included intact rotator cuff condition, irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCTs), burnishing tuberoplasty, and prosthesis tuberoplasty. Burnishing tuberoplasty refers to the process wherein osteophytes on the GT are removed using a bur, and the GT is subsequently trimmed to create a rounded surface that maintains continuity with the humeral head. Deltoid forces and actuator distances were recorded. The relationship between deltoid forces and actuator distance was graphically represented in an ascending curve. Data were collected at five points within each motion cycle, corresponding to actuator distances of 20 mm, 30 mm, 40 mm, 50 mm, and 60 mm. RESULTS: In the intact rotator cuff condition, resistance forces at the five points were 34.25 ± 7.73 N, 53.75 ± 7.44 N, 82.50 ± 14.88 N, 136.25 ± 30.21 N, and 203.75 ± 30.68 N. In the IRCT testing cycle, resistance forces were 46.13 ± 7.72 N, 63.75 ± 10.61 N, 101.25 ± 9.91 N, 152.5 ± 21.21 N, and 231.25 ± 40.16 N. Burnishing tuberoplasty resulted in resistance forces of 32.25 ± 3.54 N, 51.25 ± 3.54 N, 75.00 ± 10.69 N, 115.00 ± 10.69 N, and 183.75 ± 25.04 N. Prosthesis tuberoplasty showed resistance forces of 29.88 ± 1.55 N, 49.88 ± 1.36 N, 73.75 ± 7.44 N, 112.50 ± 7.07 N, and 182.50 ± 19.09 N. Both forms of tuberoplasty significantly reduced resistance force compared to IRCTs. Prosthesis tuberoplasty further decreased resistance force due to a smooth surface, although the difference was not significant compared to burnishing tuberoplasty. CONCLUSION: Tuberoplasty effectively reduces resistance force during dynamic shoulder abduction in irreparable rotator cuff tears. Prosthesis tuberoplasty does not offer a significant advantage over burnishing tuberoplasty in reducing resistance force. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Tuberoplasty has the potential to decrease impingement, subsequently reducing resistance force during dynamic shoulder abduction, which may be beneficial in addressing conditions like pseudoparalysis.