Comparison between all-suture and biocomposite anchors in the arthroscopic treatment of traumatic anterior shoulder instability: A retrospective cohort study

Pantekidis, Ioannis; Malahias, Michael Alexander; Kokkineli, Stefania; Brilakis, Emmanouil; Antonogiannakis, Emmanouil

doi:10.1016/j.jor.2021.03.011

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are meaningful as anterior shoulder instability remains a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons, despite the various techniques available to address this pathology. The results of this study are similar to those reported by Lee et al and Pantekidis et al, who also demonstrated comparable outcome scores and post-operative stability between patients undergoing all-suture anchor bankart repair compared to traditional anchors with an average follow-up of less than 2 years and 28 months, respectively [22,23].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

No Difference Between Anchorless and Traditional Suture Anchors in Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Clinical Comparison

Haase¹,

Wise²,

Kelly³

et al. 2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundShoulder instability and recurrent dislocations are common problems encountered by orthopedic surgeons and are frequently associated with a Bankart lesion. These are classically treated with either open or arthroscopic repair utilizing traditional suture anchors, though anchorless fixation techniques have recently been developed as an alternate fixation method that reduces native bone loss and has comparable pull-out strength. MethodsA retrospective review was performed at a single institution for patients who underwent Bankart repair from January 2008 through February 2014. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaires were mailed to 35 patients with anchorless fixation and 35 age-, gender-, and surgeon-matched patients with traditional suture anchors. Statistical analysis was performed comparing re-dislocation, additional surgery, and ASES scores with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. ResultsEleven patients in the anchorless implant group and 15 patients in the anchor group completed the questionnaire. The mean follow-up was 4.1 years in the anchorless group and 5.6 years in the anchor group (p=0.04). The number of implants was 4.82 in the anchorless group and 3.87 in the anchor group (p = 0.04). No difference was found in re-dislocation rates (p = 0.80) or additional surgery on the affected shoulder (p = 0.75). ASES scores were found to have no statistical difference (89.89 for the anchorless group versus 85.37 for the anchor group; p = 0.78). ConclusionIn patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart lesion repair with traditional anchors compared to anchorless fixation, there appears to be no difference in shoulder re-dislocation rates, recurrent ipsilateral shoulder surgery, or ASES scores.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

No Difference Between Anchorless and Traditional Suture Anchors in Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Clinical Comparison

Haase¹,

Wise²,

Kelly³

et al. 2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2,19,30,43 Furthermore, there do not appear to be differences between all-suture and biocomposite or biodegradable anchors in terms of the clinical outcome. 22,33 How, and if, these biomechanical properties of the anchors correlate with clinical results requires further investigation, likely one with high power from multicenter studies to detect if subtle differences exist.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical Analysis of Anteroinferior Bankart Repair Anchor Types

Yanke,

Allahabadi,

Wang

et al. 2023

Am J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: All-suture anchors and knotless anchors are increasingly used in the repair of anteroinferior labral tears in patients with shoulder instability. Optimal repair constructs may limit recurrent instability. Purpose: To perform a quantitative biomechanical comparison of 3 labral fixation devices for soft tissue Bankart lesions: knotless soft-body tensionable anchor (SB knotless), knotted soft-body anchor (SB knotted), and knotless hard-body PEEK (polyether ether ketone) interference anchor (HB knotless). Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 21 glenoid specimens were randomized into 3 groups: SB knotless, SB knotted, and HB knotless. Artificial Bankart lesions were created at the anteroinferior labrum. Anchors were placed at the 3:30, 4:30, and 5:30 clockface positions, and sutures were passed through 1 cm of tissue. Anchors were tested simultaneously as one construct by pulling capsular tissue connected to the anteroinferior quadrant. Cyclic loading (5-25 N, 100 cycles) was followed by load-to-failure testing (15 mm/min). Biomechanical testing variables were collected, and failure mechanisms were recorded per individual anchor. Results: There were no differences in baseline specimen characteristics. There was no difference in elongation during cyclic loading ( P = .40). The ultimate load to failure between SB knotless (309.7 ± 125.6 N), SB knotted (226.4 ± 34.8 N), and HB knotless (256.5 ± 90.5 N) did not significantly differ ( P = .25). Failure mechanisms differed among groups ( P = .008); mechanisms included anchor pullout (SB knotless: 33.3%; SB knotted: 23.8%; HB knotless: 28.6%), suture pull-through (SB knotless: 66.7%; SB knotted: 38.1%; HB knotless: 33.3%), and anchor fixation method failure, defined as knot failure for knotted anchors or locking mechanism failure for knotless anchors (SB knotless: 0.0%; SB knotted: 38.1%; HB knotless: 38.1%).) Conclusion: The SB knotless, SB knotted, and HB knotless labral fixation anchors studied exhibited comparable elongation during cyclic loading, stiffness, and ultimate loads to failure in a cadaveric model. However, the failure mechanisms significantly differed, as SB knotless anchors failed primarily from suture pull-through, while SB knotted and HB knotless anchors were subject to knot failure and locking mechanism failure, respectively. Clinical Relevance: These data support the benefit of SB knotless anchors for anteroinferior labral repair in limiting knot failure typically seen with knotted anchors, perhaps demonstrating that all-suture anchors may have better locking mechanism quality than their PEEK counterparts.

show abstract

Pain scores and functional outcomes of patients with shoulder labral repair using all-suture anchors versus conventional anchors

Freeman,

Hao,

Hones

et al. 2024

Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison between all-suture and biocomposite anchors in the arthroscopic treatment of traumatic anterior shoulder instability: A retrospective cohort study

Cited by 4 publications

References 47 publications

No Difference Between Anchorless and Traditional Suture Anchors in Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Clinical Comparison

No Difference Between Anchorless and Traditional Suture Anchors in Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Clinical Comparison

Biomechanical Analysis of Anteroinferior Bankart Repair Anchor Types

Pain scores and functional outcomes of patients with shoulder labral repair using all-suture anchors versus conventional anchors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About