Literature DB >> 12627147

Rotator cuff repair with bioabsorbable screws: An in vivo and ex vivo investigation.

Craig A Cummins1, Sabrina Strickland, Richard C Appleyard, Zoltan L Szomor, Jeanette Marshall, George A C Murrell.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate in vivo the clinical outcomes of rotator cuff repairs with bioabsorbable screws compared with metal suture anchors, and to compare the ex vivo initial load to failure of rotator cuff repairs using 3 different bioabsorbable screws, suture anchors, and transosseous sutures. TYPE OF STUDY: In vivo clinical outcomes investigation, and ex vivo biomechanical study.
METHODS: Three cohorts of patients with rotator cuff tears that measured less than 4 cm(2), were sequentially repaired with Mitek Rotator Cuff QuickAnchors (Mitek Surgical Products, Norwood, MA) (n = 9), Arthrex Headed Bio-Corkscrews (n = 9) (Arthrex, Naples, FL), and Mitek Rotator Cuff QuickAnchors (n = 9). Patients were systematically assessed with a specific shoulder questionnaire and 23 shoulder tests performed preoperatively and at 1 and 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. A correlative ex vivo biomechanical study was performed on 53 ovine shoulders to evaluate the initial failure load properties of bioabsorbable screws compared with fixation with suture anchors and transosseous sutures.
RESULTS: In the in vivo portion of the study, the cohort treated with the Headed Bio-Corkscrew demonstrated no improvement on any measured parameter until 1-year after rotator cuff repair. In contrast, shoulders repaired with Mitek Rotator Cuff QuickAnchors demonstrated improved overall shoulder function as early as 6 weeks postoperatively (P =.002), had a better constant score at 1-year after repair (88 +/- 9 v 73 +/- 17; P =.016), and a lower rate of revision rotator cuff repair (P =.029). In the ex vivo portion of the study, the bioabsorbable headed screws, Headed Bio-Corkscrew (100 +/- 30 N) and BioTwist (76 +/- 35 N), had inferior initial failure load properties compared with suture anchors (140 +/- 36 N) and transosseous sutures (147 +/- 68 N). In contrast, the BioCuff (190 +/- 56 N), a bioabsorbable implant that used a screw and serrated washer design, had equivalent initial failure load properties as the suture repairs.
CONCLUSIONS: This investigation had poorer early outcomes, a lower shoulder functional score 1-year after repair, and a higher rate of repeat surgery in patients who had their rotator cuff repaired with a bioabsorbable screw than in patients who had their shoulders repaired with a standard metal suture anchor. Furthermore, the biomechanical testing demonstrated a lower tensile load to failure in the tendons repaired with a simple screw design compared to suture anchors with a mattress stitch. Of note, the implant that used a screw and washer design demonstrated a greater ability to resist initial tensile load.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12627147     DOI: 10.1053/jars.2003.50013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthroscopy        ISSN: 0749-8063            Impact factor:   4.772


  15 in total

1.  The effect of two nonresorbable suture types on the mechanical performance over a metal suture anchor eyelet.

Authors:  D Acton; A Perry; R Evans; A Butler; P Stephens; W Bruce; J Goldberg; D Sonnabend; W R Walsh
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2003-09-12       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Rotator cuff: biology and current arthroscopic techniques.

Authors:  Olaf Lorbach; Marc Tompkins
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-01-21       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Influence of the initial rupture size and tendon subregion on three-dimensional biomechanical properties of single-row and double-row rotator cuff reconstructions.

Authors:  O Lorbach; D Pape; F Raber; L C Busch; D Kohn; M Kieb
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 4.  Single versus double-row repair of the rotator cuff: does double-row repair with improved anatomical and biomechanical characteristics lead to better clinical outcome?

Authors:  Stephan Pauly; Christian Gerhardt; Jianhai Chen; Markus Scheibel
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-08-25       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  Indications for surgery in clinical outcome studies of rotator cuff repair.

Authors:  Robert G Marx; Panagiotis Koulouvaris; Samuel K Chu; Bruce A Levy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Surgical repair of the distal biceps brachii tendon: a comparative study of three surgical fixation techniques.

Authors:  Mustafa Citak; Manuel Backhaus; Dominik Seybold; Eduardo M Suero; Thomas A Schildhauer; Bernd Roetman
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Novel single-loop and double-loop knot stitch in comparison with the modified Mason-Allen stitch for rotator cuff repair.

Authors:  Stephan Frosch; Gottfried Buchhorn; Anja Hoffmann; Peter Balcarek; Jan Philipp Schüttrumpf; Florian August; Klaus Michael Stürmer; Hans Joachim Walde; Tim Alexander Walde
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Biomechanical comparison of four double-row speed-bridging rotator cuff repair techniques with or without medial or lateral row enhancement.

Authors:  Stephan Pauly; David Fiebig; Bettina Kieser; Bjoern Albrecht; Alexander Schill; Markus Scheibel
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Biocomposite Suture Anchors Remain Visible Two Years After Rotator Cuff Repair.

Authors:  Mirco Sgroi; Theresa Friesz; Michael Schocke; Heiko Reichel; Thomas Kappe
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Metallic versus biodegradable suture anchors for rotator cuff repair: a case control study.

Authors:  Umile Giuseppe Longo; Stefano Petrillo; Mattia Loppini; Vincenzo Candela; Giacomo Rizzello; Nicola Maffulli; Vincenzo Denaro
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2019-10-25       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.