Arthroscopic glenoid labral lesion repair using all-suture anchor for traumatic anterior shoulder instability: short-term results

Risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Recurrent instability remains a major source of morbidity following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Many risk factors and predictive tools have been described, but there remains a lack of consensus surrounding individual risk factors and their contribution to outcomes. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to identify and quantify risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the PubMed/MEDLINE databases based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated risk factors for recurrent instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair.

RESULTS

Overall, 111 studies were included in the analysis, including a total of 19,307 patients and 2750 episodes of recurrent instability with 45 risk factors described. Age at operation was reported by 60 studies, with 35 finding increased risk at younger ages. Meta-analysis showed a 2-fold recurrence rate of 27.0% (171 of 634) for patients <20 years old compared with 13.3% (197 of 1485) for older patients (P < .001). Seventeen studies completed multivariable analysis, 13 of which were significant (odds ratio 1.3-14.0). Glenoid bone loss was evaluated by 39 studies, with 20 finding an increased risk. Multivariable analysis in 9 studies found odds ratios ranging from 0.7 to 35.1; 6 were significant. Off-track Hill-Sachs lesions were evaluated in 21 studies (13 significant), with 3 of 4 studies that conducted multivariable analysis finding a significant association with odds ratio of 2.9-8.9 of recurrence. The number of anchors used in repair was reported by 25 studies, with 4 finding increased risk with fewer anchors. Pooled analysis demonstrated a 25.0% (29 of 156) risk of recurrence with 2 anchors, compared with 18.1% (89 of 491) with 3 or more anchors (P = .06). Other frequently described risk factors included glenohumeral joint hyperlaxity (46% of studies reporting a significant association), number of preoperative dislocations (31%), contact sport participation (20%), competitive sport participation (46%), patient sex (7%), and concomitant superior labral anterior-posterior tear (0%).

CONCLUSION

Younger age, glenoid bone loss, and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions are established risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Other commonly reported risk factors included contact and competitive sports participation, number of fixation devices, and patient sex.

Two-Portal Arthroscopic Knotless All-Suture Anchor Posterior Labral Repair

Isolated posterior shoulder instability accounts for approximately 10% of shoulder instability cases. Patients may present after an acute trauma or with insidious onset and associated posterior shoulder pain. Knotless and all-suture anchor devices have become increasing popular and are often used in arthroscopic shoulder instability cases to avoid knot stacks and allow for the ability to re-tension the fixation. This technical note describes our technique for 2-portal posterior labral repair using knotless all-suture anchors with the patient in the lateral decubitus position.

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

HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare PROMs in patients undergoing anterior glenoid labral repair using all-suture versus conventional anchors. We hypothesized PROMs would be similar between groups.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the Arthrex Global Surgical Outcomes System (SOS) database, querying patients who underwent arthroscopic glenoid labral repair between 01/01/2015 and 12/31/2020. Patients aged 18-100, who had isolated glenoid labrum repair with at least 12-month follow-up were included. The visual analog pain scale (VAS), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, Veteran's RAND 12-items health survey, single assessment numeric evaluation and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES) were compared preoperatively, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years postoperatively in patients who received all-suture anchors versus conventional anchors in the setting of anterior glenoid labrum repair. Our primary aim was comparison of PROMs between patients receiving all-suture versus conventional suture anchors. Secondarily, a sub-analysis was performed comparing outcomes based on anchor utilization for patients with noted anterior instability.

RESULTS

We evaluated 566 patients, 54 patients receiving all-suture anchors and 512 patients receiving conventional anchors. At two-year follow-up there was no significant difference between the two groups in PROMs. In a sub-analysis of isolated anterior labrum repair, there was an improvement in ASES (P = 0.034) and VAS (P = 0.039) with the all-suture anchor at two-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

All-suture anchors provide similar or superior pain and functional outcome scores up to 2 years postoperatively compared to conventional anchors.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

As all-suture anchors gain popularity among surgeons, this is the largest scale study to date validating their use in the setting of glenoid labrum repair. Institutional Review Board (IRB): IRB202102550.

Retrospective Comparative Analysis of Clinical and Functional Outcome After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair using All-Suture Anchor and Metal Anchor

Introduction

Both knotted all suture anchors and metal anchors are used for arthroscopic Bankart repair. We retrospectively evaluated and compared clinical and functional outcomes after arthroscopic Bankart repair using the knotted all-suture anchors and knotted metal anchors.

Materials and methods

In a retrospective cohort analysis, patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair without any concomitant additional lesion repair using either all-suture anchors or metal anchors, between January 2015 and May 2018 were identified. Their pre- and post-operative functional and clinical outcomes were compared using Rowe and WOSI scores. The recurrence rate in the two groups was also compared.

Results

A total of 41 patients in all suture anchors group and 47 in the metal anchors group were identified as per inclusion and exclusion criteria. The demographic profile of both groups was comparable. There was no significant difference in clinical and functional outcome between the two suture anchor groups as per Rowe (pre-operative 40.13+6.51 vs 38.09+6.24 and post-operative 2 years 93.28+7.09 vs 92.55+9.2) and WOSI (pre-operative 943.05+216.64 vs 977.55+165.46 and post-operative 2 years 278.21+227.56 vs 270.94+186.25) scores. There was a significant improvement in both the groups between preoperative and post-operative ROWE and WOSI scores at 6 months and 2 years follow-up as compared to pre-operative scores (p<0.001). Re-dislocation rates were also comparable (4.8% vs 6.3%).

Conclusion

All-suture anchors showed comparable clinical and functional results as the metal anchors for arthroscopic Bankart repair at two-year follow-up.

An All-Suture Anchor Offers Equivalent Clinical Performance to an Established Solid Suture Anchor in the Arthroscopic Repair of Rotator Cuff Tears: A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Trial With 12-Month Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a next-generation, all-suture anchor in patients undergoing arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears, compared with that of an established solid suture anchor.

METHODS

Between April 2019 and January 2021, a prospective, comparative, randomized controlled noninferiority study conducted on people with Chinese ethnicity at 3 tertiary hospitals enrolled patients (18-75 years) requiring arthroscopic treatment for rotator cuff tears. Patients were randomized into 2 cohorts receiving either all-suture anchor or solid suture anchor and followed for 12 months. The primary outcome was the Constant-Murley score at the 12-month follow-up. Magnetic resonance imaging assessments determined the rate of retear of rotator cuff repair (defined as Sugaya classification 4 and 5). Safety evaluation was performed at all follow-up points to determine the adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

In total, 120 patients with rotator cuff tears (mean age, 58.3 years; 62.5% female; 60 receiving all-suture anchor) underwent treatment. Five patients were lost to follow-up. Both cohorts showed significant improvement in Constant-Murley scores between baseline and 6 months (P < .001) and between 6 and 12 months (P < .001). There were no significant differences in Constant-Murley scores between the 2 cohorts at 12 months (P = .122) after operation. The retear rate at 12 months was 5.7% and 1.9% in the all-suture and solid suture anchor cohorts, respectively (P = .618). There were 2 cases of intraoperative anchor pullout, both of which were successfully resolved. No cases of postoperative reoperation or other anchor-related AEs were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The all-suture anchor offered equivalent clinical performance to an established solid suture anchor at the 12-month follow-up in patients undergoing arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears. The retear rate was not statistically significantly different between the 2 cohorts.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Posterior Labral Repair Using Knotless "All-Suture" Suture Anchors

Isolated posterior instability is well described but relatively uncommon, accounting for less than 10% of all shoulder instability cases. When nonoperative management fails, surgical outcomes demonstrate improved patient-reported outcomes with a high level of return to sport. Knotless suture anchor and "all-suture" suture anchor technology are now available and used for instability procedures in the shoulder. This technical description describes knotless "all-suture" suture anchor fixation for isolated posterior labral tears.

Comparison of all-suture anchors with metallic anchors in arthroscopic cuff repair: Structural and functional properties and clinical suitability

Purpose

This study examined and compared all-suture anchors with metallic anchors in the arthroscopic repair of small to medium supraspinatus tears; a multi-dimensional evaluation protocol assessed (i) clinical, (ii) ultrasonographical, and (iii) functional criteria at mid-term.

Materials and methods

A sample of 40 patients, prescreened from a larger group who had undergone arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, were resolved into two groups of 20, based on the type of anchor used in their surgery (all-suture or metallic) and were evaluated postoperatively (mean = 44.3 months, SEM = 22.4 months, minimum period = 10.3 months). Clinical assessments included (i) objective and subjective scores (Constant, DASH, SPADI, SST), (ii) ultrasonographical examination, as well as (iii) isometric and isokinetic strength testing. Raw data from the operated side was compared with those from the contralateral side within each group. Raw data for the PROMs and for the US evaluation were compared between groups. Strength data, as well as the Constant score values, were further analyzed based on (i) the difference between operated and intact sides, as well as (ii) the strength ratio between operated and intact sides; the transformed data were then compared between the two groups.

Results

We found no statistically significant differences in any of the parameters considered between shoulders operated using ASAs or MAs, nor between operated and non-operated sides in each group.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that the reliability and performance characteristics of all-suture anchors and metallic anchors are practically indistinguishable for arthroscopic treatment of small to medium lesions of the supraspinatus tendon.

Arthroscopic Posterior Capsulolabral Repair With Suture-First Versus Anchor-First Technique in Patients With Posterior Shoulder Instability (Type B2): Clinical Midterm Follow-up

Background

Isolated soft tissue injuries of the posterior capsulolabral complex can be addressed arthroscopically, with various anchor systems available for repair.

Purpose

To evaluate clinical and patient-reported outcomes after arthroscopic capsulolabral repair in patients with posterior shoulder instability (PSI) and to compare differences in outcomes between patients treated with a suture-first technique (PushLock anchor) and an anchor-first technique (FiberTak all-suture anchor).

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Included were 32 patients with dynamic structural PSI (type B2 according to the ABC classification) treated with an arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair. After a mean follow-up time of 4.8 ± 3.4 years (range, 2-11) patients were evaluated clinically, and standardized outcome scores were obtained for the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Rowe, Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic (KJOC), patient satisfaction (0-5 [best]), and pain on a visual analog scale (VAS; 0-10 [worst]).

Results

The overall satisfaction level with the outcome of the surgery was 4.6 ± 0.5 (range, 4-5). No patient suffered from instability events. The mean VAS level for pain was 0.4 ± 0.9 (range, 0-4) at rest and 1.9 ± 2.0 (range, 0-6) during motion. The mean SSV was 80 ± 17 (range, 30-100), the mean postoperative WOSI score 75% ± 19% (range, 18-98), the mean Rowe score 78 ± 20 (range, 10-100), and the mean KJOC score was 81 ± 18 (range, 40-100) for the entire cohort. There was no significant difference between the techniques with regard to range of motion, strength, or clinical outcome scores.

Conclusion

Arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair was a satisfactory method to treat structural PSI type B2 with regard to stability, pain relief, and functional restoration. The majority of patients had good outcomes. No differences in outcomes were observed between the anchor-first and suture-first techniques.

Arthroscopic Posterior Labral Repair in Active-Duty Military Patients: A Reliable Solution for an At-Risk Population, Regardless of Anchor Type

BACKGROUND

Active-duty servicemembers are a population at risk for the development of posterior shoulder instability. While short-term outcomes after arthroscopic posterior labral repair for posterior shoulder instability are promising, there is a paucity of longer term follow-up data for this procedure.

PURPOSES

The primary purpose was to report midterm outcomes after arthroscopic posterior labral repair in active-duty military patients for posterior shoulder instability without bone loss. The secondary purpose was to determine if outcomes varied between anchor types used.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Preoperative and postoperative outcomes, with a minimum 3-year follow-up, for a visual analog scale for pain, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and the Rowe score were collected and analyzed. A separate subgroup analysis was performed comparing the outcomes of patients who underwent repair with biocomposite anchors versus those who underwent repair with all-suture anchors.

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients with a mean follow-up of 82.55 ± 24.20 months met the inclusion criteria and were available for analysis. As a whole, the cohort demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvements in outcome scores at final follow-up. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion did not vary significantly. While the difference in final outcome scores between the 2 anchor types did not reach statistical significance, a statistically significantly larger proportion of patients who underwent repair with all-suture anchors versus those who underwent repair with biocomposite anchors met the Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the SANE (97.14% vs 78.95%, respectively; P = .0180) and the ASES score (88.57% vs 68.42%, respectively; P = .0171). The proportion of patients who achieved the substantial clinical benefit or surpassed the minimal clinically important difference, however, did not vary by anchor type. Overall, 70 patients (95.89%) remained on active duty and were able to return to preinjury work and recreational activity levels. There were 3 patients (4.11%) who had recurrent posterior instability.

CONCLUSION

This population of active-duty servicemembers undergoing posterior labral repair for posterior labral instability without bone loss demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant improvement in midterm outcomes, a low recurrence rate, and a rate of return to active duty of 95.89%, regardless of the anchor type used.

Editorial Commentary: All-Suture Anchors Are Evidence-Based and Biomechanically Sound but Require Additional Clinical Outcomes Evaluation

All-suture anchors (ASA) have gained great interest in our community, and multiple biomechanical studies have investigated their primary stability. Equal stability with similar load to failure has been observed for ASA in comparison to current standard implants. Although important biomechanical observations have been made, clinical outcomes are rare for ASA. Consequently, there is a lack of evidence for the clinical benefits of ASA.

All-Suture Anchors in Orthopaedic Surgery: Design, Rationale, Biomechanical Data, and Clinical Outcomes

All-suture anchors (ASAs) are a relatively new alternative to traditional suture anchors, comprised of sutures, suture tapes, or ribbons woven through a soft sleeve. These novel anchors are typically smaller than traditional anchors, allowing for more anchors to be used in the same amount of space or for use when bone stock is limited, for example, in revision settings. They can be inserted through curved guides to reach more challenging locations, and they have thus far had similar loads to failure during biomechanical testing as traditional anchors. However, these benefits must be weighed against new challenges. When using ASAs, care must be taken to fully deploy and seat the anchor against cortical bone for optimal fixation and to prevent gap formation. Furthermore, decortication, often performed to enhance the biologic environment for soft-tissue healing, may weaken the cortical bone on which ASA fixation depends on. The purpose of this article is to provide insight on the designs, advantages, and potential disadvantages associated with ASAs, as well as review the available biomechanical and clinical data.

High Variability of the Definition of Recurrent Glenohumeral Instability: An Analysis of the Current Literature by a Systematic Review

Purpose

To determine the definitions for recurrence used in the literature, assess the consensus in using these definitions, and determine the impact of these definitions on recurrence rates.

Methods

A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE including studies from 2000 to 2020 reporting on recurrence rates after anterior arthroscopic shoulder instability surgery. Dislocation, apprehension, subluxation and recurrence rates were compared.

Results

Ninety-one studies were included. In 68% of the eligible studies, recurrence rates are not well defined. Thirty (33%) studies did not report on dislocations, 45 (49%) did not report on subluxations, and 58 (64%) did not report on apprehension. Seventeen different definitions for recurrence of instability, 4 definitions of dislocations, and 8 definitions of subluxation were used.

Conclusion

Recurrence rates are poorly specified and likely underreported in the literature, hampering comparison with results of other studies. This highlights the need for a consensus on definition of recurrence across shoulder instability studies. We recommend not using the definition recurrence of instability anymore. We endorse defining dislocations as a radiographically confirmed dislocation or a dislocation that is manually reduced, subluxations as the feeling of a dislocation that can be (spontaneously) reduced without the need for a radiographically confirmed dislocation, and a positive apprehension sign as fear of imminent dislocation when placing the arm in abduction and external rotation during physical examination. Reporting on the events resulting in a dislocation or subluxation aids in making an estimation of the severity of instability.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review.

All-suture anchors versus metal suture anchors in the arthroscopic treatment of traumatic anterior shoulder instability: A comparison of mid-term outcomes

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to compare metal suture anchors and all-suture anchors clinically and radiologically in arthroscopic Bankart repair.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, 67 patients (61 males, 6 females; mean age 26.0±5.8; range, 18 to 43 years) who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair between April 2009 and October 2016 were divided into two groups depending on the type of the suture anchor used in different periods. Group A comprised 32 patients with arthroscopic Bankart repair performed with metal suture anchors, and Group B comprised 35 patients with arthroscopic Bankart repair performed with all-suture anchors. The patients were clinically evaluated using Rowe scores, Constant scores, redislocation rates, and positive apprehension test rates. Radiographic evaluation was performed using the Samilson-Prieto classification to observe the development of glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 41.1±10.4 (range, 30 to 60) months in Group A, and 39.6±9.4 (range, 28 to 60) months in Group B, with no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.559). No significant difference was observed between Group A and Group B in terms of mean Rowe score (89.2±13.8 [range, 40 to 100] vs. 88.7±16.9 [range, 25 to 100]; p=0.895) or Constant score (87.2±8.9 [range, 48 to 96] vs. 86.9±9.0 [range, 46 to 96]; p=0.878), which were the clinical outcomes at the final follow-up examination. Postoperative redislocation rates (3.1% vs. 2.9%, p=1.0) and positive apprehension test rates (6.3% vs. 8.6%, p=1.0) were found to be similar in both groups. According to the Samilson-Prieto classification, there was no evidence of glenohumeral osteoarthritis in any of the patients in either group.

CONCLUSION

Satisfactory outcomes were obtained with the use of all-suture anchors in arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability. All-suture anchors and metal suture anchors, have similar outcomes in the mid-term and all-suture anchors are a reliable and effective option for arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Age, participation in competitive sports, bony lesions, ALPSA lesions, > 1 preoperative dislocations, surgical delay and ISIS score > 3 are risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 4584 shoulders

PURPOSE

Determining the risk of recurrent instability following an arthroscopic Bankart repair can be challenging, as numerous risk factors have been identified that might predispose recurrent instability. However, an overview with quantitative analysis of all available risk factors is lacking. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to identify risk factors that are associated with recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, CINAHL/Ebsco, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics from inception up to November 12th 2020. Studies evaluating risk factors for recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair with a minimal follow-up of 2 years were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria and comprised a total of 4582 shoulders (4578 patients). Meta-analyses were feasible for 22 risk factors and demonstrated that age ≤ 20 years (RR = 2.02; P < 0.00001), age ≤ 30 years (RR = 2.62; P = 0.005), participation in competitive sports (RR = 2.40; P = 0.02), Hill-Sachs lesion (RR = 1.77; P = 0.0005), off-track Hill-Sachs lesion (RR = 3.24; P = 0.002), glenoid bone loss (RR = 2.38; P = 0.0001), ALPSA lesion (RR = 1.90; P = 0.03), > 1 preoperative dislocations (RR = 2.02; P = 0.03), > 6 months surgical delay (RR = 2.86; P < 0.0001), ISIS > 3 (RR = 3.28; P = 0.0007) and ISIS > 6 (RR = 4.88; P < 0.00001) were risk factors for recurrence. Male gender, an affected dominant arm, hyperlaxity, participation in contact and/or overhead sports, glenoid fracture, SLAP lesion with/without repair, rotator cuff tear, > 5 preoperative dislocations and using ≤ 2 anchors could not be confirmed as risk factors. In addition, no difference was observed between the age groups ≤ 20 and 21-30 years.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analyses demonstrated that age ≤ 20 years, age ≤ 30 years, participation in competitive sports, Hill-Sachs lesion, off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, glenoid bone loss, ALPSA lesion, > 1 preoperative dislocations, > 6 months surgical delay from first-time dislocation to surgery, ISIS > 3 and ISIS > 6 were risk factors for recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair. These factors can assist clinicians in giving a proper advice regarding treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Editorial Commentary: What is the Difference That Makes the Differences? The Practical Rationality of the All-Suture Anchor

Suture anchor technologies are constantly being innovated in the quest for improved stability, biological integration and clinical outcomes. However, the decision about the choice of suture-anchor materials remain elusive. There are some factors, including reliability, effectiveness, simplicity, familiarity, and cost, that affect a surgeon's preference. The relative weights placed on different factors by different surgeons play decisive roles in individual choice. But decisions and choices are not arbitrary or merely subjective. Alternative options can be warranted or contested by rational argumentation. At the end, there may be losses and gains in the change of 1 suture anchor for another, but science does progress.

Biomechanical Comparison of Knotless All-Suture Anchors and Knotted All-Suture Anchors in Type II SLAP Lesions: A Cadaveric Study

PURPOSE

To compare the biomechanical performance of knotless versus knotted all-suture anchors for the repair of type II SLAP lesions with a simulated peel-back mechanism.

METHODS

Twenty paired cadaveric shoulders were used. A standardized type II SLAP repair was performed using knotless (group A) or knotted (group B) all-suture anchors. The long head of the biceps (LHB) tendon was loaded in a posterior direction to simulate the peel-back mechanism. Cyclic loading was performed followed by load-to-failure testing. Stiffness, load at 1 and 2 mm of displacement, load to repair failure, load to ultimate failure, and failure modes were assessed.

RESULTS

The mean load to repair failure was similar in groups A (179.99 ± 58.42 N) and B (167.83 ± 44.27 N, P = .530). The mean load to ultimate failure was 230 ± 95.93 N in group A and 229.48 ± 78.45 N in group B and did not differ significantly (P = .958). Stiffness (P = .980), as well as load at 1 mm (P = .721) and 2 mm (P = .849) of displacement, did not differ significantly between groups. In 16 of the 20 specimens (7 in group A and 9 in group B), ultimate failure occurred at the proximal LHB tendon. Failed occurred through slippage of the labrum in 1 specimen in each group and through anchor pullout in 2 specimens in group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Knotless and knotted all-suture anchors displayed high initial fixation strength with no significant differences between groups in type II SLAP lesions. Ultimate failure occurred predominantly as tears of the proximal LHB tendon.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

All-suture anchors have a smaller diameter than solid anchors, can be inserted through curved guides, preserve bone stock, and facilitate postoperative imaging. There is a paucity of literature investigating the biomechanical capacities of knotless versus knotted all-suture anchors in type II SLAP repair.

Pullout strength and failure mode of industrially manufactured and self-made all-suture anchors: a biomechanical analysis

BACKGROUND

This study presents a new technique for assembling an all-suture anchor from existing medical products. The biomechanical characteristics of this self-made anchor (SMA) are compared with those of an industrially manufactured all-suture anchor.

METHODS

The SMAs were made from established medical products (FiberWire #2 and 2-mm FiberTape; Arthrex, Naples, FL, USA). Pretesting was performed in biphasic polyurethane foam blocks. In the next step, 10 SMAs and 10 industrially made anchors (IMAs; 1.8-mm double-loaded Y-Knot Flex all-suture anchor; ConMed Linvatec, Largo, FL, USA) were applied with an insertion tool and tested in fresh porcine femora using a servohydraulic testing system, with a preload of 10 N and a displacement rate of 12.5 mm/s. Pullout strength and failure mode were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean load at failure in the foam blocks was 459 ± 124 N in the SMA group and 538 ± 83 N in the IMA group. In porcine bone, failure occurred at 461 ± 102 N in the SMA group and 431 ± 135 N in the IMA group. The differences in pullout strength between the 2 types of anchor were not statistically significant, either in the foam blocks (P = .17) or in porcine bone (P = .62).

CONCLUSION

A handmade all-suture anchor using 2 high-strength sutures woven into a 2-mm strip of high-strength tape did not show statistically different failure loads in polyurethane foam or in porcine metaphyseal bone in comparison with a commercially produced double-loaded all-suture anchor. The principal mode of failure in porcine bone in both groups was anchor pullout.

Comparison of the clinical results of isolated Bankart and SLAP 5 lesions after arthroscopic repair

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to compare the clinical results of patients with traumatic isolated Bankart lesions and type V superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) lesions after arthroscopic repair.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic repair for traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability were evaluated retrospectively between December 2014 and January 2019. Fifty-one patients (49 males, 2 females; mean age 25 years; range, 18 to 36 years) without bone defects affecting >20% of the glenoid fossa, off-track engaging Hills-Sachs lesions, multidirectional instability, or ligamentous laxity were included in the study. Group 1 had 31 patients with isolated Bankart lesions and group 2 had 20 patients with type V SLAP lesions. There were only two female patients in group 1 and all patients were male in group 2. The mean age was 25 years (range, 18 to 36 years) in group 1 and 25 years (range, 19 to 35 years) in group 2. Rowe, Constant, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) scoring systems were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the patients preoperatively and at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 32 months (range, 12 to 48 months) in group 1 and 28.5 months (range, 12 to 42 months) in group 2. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the number of shoulder dislocations before the surgery, mean age at the time of surgery, and the mean time from the first dislocation to surgical treatment. When the Rowe, Constant, and WOSI scores were evaluated preoperatively and at the last follow-up, there were statistically significant changes within, but not between, the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In type V SLAP lesions, the affected and repaired labrum surface area is larger than isolated Bankart lesions. However, as a result of appropriate surgical treatment, the affected surface area does not have a negative effect on clinical outcomes, and similar clinical results can be obtained in patients with type V SLAP lesions compared to patients with isolated Bankart lesions.

All-Arthroscopic, 270° Reconstruction of the Inferior Glenohumeral Ligament With Palmaris Longus Autograft

Numerous factors play a role in anterior shoulder stability. The inferior glenohumeral ligament, especially the anterior band, is the main passive anterior stabilizer in the end range of motion. Surgical treatment of this pathology continues to be a challenge in patients with capsular deficiency, in whom the recurrence rate of soft-tissue arthroscopic repair increases significantly. There is not yet a fair solution for these patients without glenoid bone loss, in whom the poor tissue quality determines recurrent instability. We present an all-arthroscopic technique for reconstruction of the inferior glenohumeral ligament by means of palmaris longus autograft as an alternative to nonanatomic bone block procedures.