Effect of three remplissage techniques on tendon coverage and shoulder kinematics: a navigated robotic biomechanical study

Table 1 External rotational glenohumeral torque [Nm] of three remplissage techniques compared to intact native specimens

0° gh-Abduction		Mean [Nm]	SD	95 % CI for Mean		p-value
0° gh-Abduction		Mean [Nm]	SD	Lower Bound	Upper Bound	p-value
0° ER	Intact	0	0.01	0	0.01
	Knot (T1)	0	0.04	−0.03	0.04	n.s.
	Pully (T2)	−0.01	0.03	−0.04	0.02	n.s.
	Tape (T3)	0	0.01	−0.01	0.02	n.s.
30° ER	Intact	0.04	0.06	−0.02	0.1
	Knot (T1)	0.09	0.13	−0.02	0.21	n.s.
	Pully (T2)	0.17	0.18	0.01	0.34	n.s.
	Tape (T3)	0.12	0.13	0	0.24	n.s.
60° ER	Intact	0.04	0.14	−0.09	0.17
	Knot (T1)	0.2	0.33	−0.1	0.5	n.s.
	Pully (T2)	0.26	0.25	0.03	0.5	n.s.
	Tape (T3)	0.21	0.33	−0.1	0.52	n.s.
30° gh-Abduction
0° ER	Intact	0	0.01	−0.01	0.01
	Knot (T1)	−0.02	0.02	−0.04	0.01	n.s.
	Pully (T2)	−0.02	0.04	−0.06	0.01	n.s.
	Tape (T3)	−0.01	0.02	−0.03	0.01	n.s.
30° ER	Intact	0.05	0.06	0	0.11
	Knot (T1)	0.08	0.06	0.02	0.14	n.s.
	Pully (T2)	0.15	0.14	0.02	0.28	n.s.
	Tape (T3)	0.08	0.07	0.02	0.14	n.s.
60° ER	Intact	0.06	0.11	−0.05	0.17
	Knot (T1)	0.1	0.13	−0.02	0.23	n.s.
	Pully (T2)	0.17	0.14	0.04	0.3	n.s.
	Tape (T3)	0.09	0.09	0.01	0.17	n.s.
60° gh-Abduction
0° ER	Intact	0	0.01	−0.02	0.01
	Knot (T1)	0	0.02	−0.01	0.02	n.s.
	Pully (T2)	0	0.02	−0.02	0.02	n.s.
	Tape (T3)	0.01	0.02	−0.01	0.02	n.s.
30° ER	Intact	0.05	0.06	0	0.11
	Knot (T1)	0.13	0.08	0.06	0.2	0.05
	Pully (T2)	0.14	0.07	0.08	0.2	0.02
	Tape (T3)	0.14	0.1	0.05	0.23	0.02
60° ER	Intact	0.05	0.09	−0.03	0.13
	Knot (T1)	0.15	0.11	0.05	0.25	0.02
	Pully (T2)	0.18	0.1	0.08	0.28	0.04
	Tape (T3)	0.15	0.07	0.08	0.21	0.00

ISSN: 1471-2474