Literature DB >> 17418326

Cyclic load testing of biodegradable suture anchors containing 2 high-strength sutures.

F Alan Barber1, David A Coons, Michell Ruiz-Suarez.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test 4 different biodegradable suture anchors threaded with 2 high-strength sutures under cyclic loading conditions in humeral cadaveric specimens divided into 2 different age groups.
METHODS: Thirty-two paired human cadaveric humeri were stripped of all soft tissue. Two groups were studied: group 1, in which the mean age was 54 years, and group 2, in which the mean age was 70 years. We placed 1 suture anchor at 3 humeral sites per bone (anterior, middle, and posterior greater tuberosity). We tested 24 specimens using each of 4 anchors: TwinFix AB (Smith & Nephew Endoscopy, Andover, MA), BioZip (Stryker Endoscopy, San Jose, CA), Bio-Corkscrew FT (Arthrex, Naples, FL), and SpiraLok (DePuy Mitek, Raynham, MA). The anchor's sutures were grasped with an Instron clamp (Instron, Canton, MA), preloaded, and cycled from 10 to 60 N 500 times, followed by destructive testing. The mean displacement at 500 cycles, yield loads, failure modes, and ultimate loads were recorded.
RESULTS: Most cyclic motion occurred during the first 100 cycles. More motion occurred in older bones than in younger bones (P < .05). The mean yield loads were greater for the young group for the SpiraLok anchors than for Bio-Corkscrew FT anchors in the young and old groups (P < .001), TwinFix anchors in the old group (P < .05), and BioZip anchors in the old group (P < .05). The ultimate failure loads for SpiraLok anchors in the young group were greater than for Bio-Corkscrew FT anchors in the young and old groups and BioZip anchors in the old group (P < .05). In group 1 TwinFix AB (P = .01) and BioZip (P = .02) ultimate loads were statistically greater than that for Bio-Corkscrew FT. The TwinFix AB failed by anchor pullout. The Bio-Corkscrew FT failed by eyelet pullout. The BioZip and SpiraLok pulled out in older bone and experienced eyelet breakage in younger bone. None of the 4 anchors reached 5 mm of displacement even after 500 loading cycles.
CONCLUSIONS: Most of the displacement occurred in the first 100 cycles. Of all anchors tested, the Bio-Corkscrew FT recorded the lowest displacement after 500 cycles (P < .05). The SpiraLok had the highest ultimate load of all anchors tested (P < .01). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Rotator cuff anchors perform differently in younger humeral bone than in older humeral bone. Most displacement with cyclic loading occurring between the anchor and bone takes place in the first 100 cycles. Anchors in older bones can be expected to fail at lower loads.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17418326     DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2006.12.009

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


  12 in total

1.  Cyclic loading comparison of Bio-SutureTak-#2 FiberWire and Bio Mini-Revo-#2 Hi-Fi suture anchor-sutures in cadaveric scapulae.

Authors:  Brad S Sparks; John Nyland; Akbar Nawab; Ethan Blackburn; Ryan Krupp; Robert Burden
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2007-11-20       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Maximum load to failure and tensile displacement of an all-suture glenoid anchor compared with a screw-in glenoid anchor.

Authors:  Tim Dwyer; Thomas L Willett; Andrew P Dold; Massimo Petrera; David Wasserstein; Danny B Whelan; John S Theodoropoulos
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Changes in tendon length with increasing rotator cuff tear size.

Authors:  Kyung Cheon Kim; Hyun Dae Shin; Bo Kun Kim; Soo Min Cha; Jun Yeong Park
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-09-17       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Stimulation of Rotator Cuff Repair by Sustained Release of Bone Morphogenetic Protein-7 Using a Gelatin Hydrogel Sheet.

Authors:  Yukichi Kabuto; Toru Morihara; Tsuyoshi Sukenari; Yoshikazu Kida; Ryo Oda; Yuji Arai; Koshiro Sawada; Ken-Ichi Matsuda; Mitsuhiro Kawata; Yasuhiko Tabata; Hiroyoshi Fujiwara; Toshikazu Kubo
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2015-05-12       Impact factor: 3.845

5.  Biomechanical evaluation of suture-tendon interface and tissue holding of three suture configurations in torn and degenerated versus intact human rotator cuffs.

Authors:  Matthias V Wlk; Ashraf Abdelkafy; Michael Hexel; Christian Krasny; Nicolas Aigner; Roland Meizer; Franz Landsiedl
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-04-18       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Biologic augmentation of rotator cuff repair with mesenchymal stem cells during arthroscopy improves healing and prevents further tears: a case-controlled study.

Authors:  Philippe Hernigou; Charles Henri Flouzat Lachaniette; Jerome Delambre; Sebastien Zilber; Pascal Duffiet; Nathalie Chevallier; Helene Rouard
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-06-07       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  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

8.  Conventional rotator cuff repair complemented by the aid of mononuclear autologous stem cells.

Authors:  João L Ellera Gomes; Ricardo Canquerini da Silva; Lúcia M R Silla; Marcelo R Abreu; Roberto Pellanda
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-07-20       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Arthroscopic Double-Row Transosseous Equivalent Rotator Cuff Repair with a Knotless Self-Reinforcing Technique.

Authors:  William R Mook; Joshua A Greenspoon; Peter J Millett
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2016-07-21

10.  Biomechanical Comparison of a First- and a Second-Generation All-Soft Suture Glenoid Anchor.

Authors:  John Erickson; Frank Chiarappa; Jonathan Haskel; Justin Rice; Adam Hyatt; James Monica; Aman Dhawan
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2017-07-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.