Literature DB >> 27450741

Bioabsorbable versus metallic interference screws for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Pedro Debieux1, Carlos E S Franciozi, Mário Lenza, Marcel Jun Tamaoki, Robert A Magnussen, Flávio Faloppa, João Carlos Belloti.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are frequently treated with surgical reconstruction with grafts, frequently patella tendon or hamstrings. Interference screws are often used to secure the graft in bone tunnels in the femur and tibia. This review examines whether bioabsorbable interference screws give better results than metal interference screws when used for graft fixation in ACL reconstruction.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of bioabsorbable versus metallic interference screws for graft fixation in ACL reconstruction. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, trial registers and reference lists of articles. Date of search: January 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials comparing bioabsorbable with metallic interferences screws in ACL reconstruction. The main outcomes sought were subjective-rated knee function, failure of treatment, and activity level. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors selected eligible trials, independently assessed risk of bias, and cross-checked data. Data were pooled whenever relevant and possible. Requests for further information were sent to the original study authors. MAIN
RESULTS: We included 12 trials (11 randomised and one quasi-randomised) involving a total of 944 participants, and reporting follow-up results for 774. Participants in the 12 trials underwent ACL reconstruction with either hamstring tendon grafts (five trials) or patellar tendon grafts (seven trials). Trials participants were randomly allocated to bioabsorbable or metallic interference screws for graft fixation in both femur and tibia (seven trials); femur only (three trials); tibia only (one trial); location was not reported in the remaining trial. A variety of materials was used for the bioabsorbable screws, Poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA) being the most common. The metallic screws, where reported, were titanium.All trials were at high risk of bias, which invariably included performance bias. Seven trials were at high risk of attrition bias and eight at high risk of reporting bias. The quasi-randomised trial was assessed as being at high risk for selection bias. Based on these study limitations and insufficiency of the available data, we judged the quality of evidence for all outcomes was very low.The majority of the available data for patient-reported knee function was presented as Lysholm scores (0 to 100; higher scores = better function). There was very low quality but consistent evidence of no clinically important differences between the two groups in Lysholm scores at 12 months follow-up (mean difference (MD) -0.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.48 to 1.32; three trials, 168 participants); 24 months (MD 0.35, 95% CI -1.27 to 1.98; three trials, 113 participants) or five or more years follow-up (MD 1.23, 95% CI -2.00 to 4.47; two trials, 71 participants). This lack of between-group differences was also reported for Lysholm scores in several trials that did not provide sufficient data for pooling as well as for other self-reported knee function scores reported in several trials.Treatment failure was represented by the summed data for implant breakage during surgery and major postoperative complications (implant failure, graft rupture, symptomatic foreign body reactions, effusion and treated arthrofibrosis and related conditions) that were usually described in the trial reports as requiring further substantive treatment. There is very low-quality evidence of greater treatment failure in the bioabsorbable screw group (60/451 versus 29/434; risk ratio (RR) 1.94 favouring metallic screw fixation, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.93; 885 participants, 11 studies). In a population with an assumed risk (based on the median control group risk) of 56 participants per 1000 having treatment failure after metallic screw fixation, this equates to 53 more (95% CI 17 to 108 more) per 1000 participants having treatment failure after bioabsorbable screw fixation. All 16 intraoperative complications in the bioabsorbable screw group were implant breakages upon screw insertion. Treatment failure defined as postoperative complications only still favoured the metallic screw group but the 95% CI also included the potential for a greater risk of treatment failure after metallic screw fixation: 44/451 versus 29/434; RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.23. Based on the assumed risk of 56 participants per 1000 having postoperative treatment failure after metallic screw fixation, this equates to 25 more (95% CI 4 fewer and 69 more) per 1000 participants having this outcome after bioabsorbable screw fixation.There was very low-quality evidence of very similar activity levels in the two groups at 12 and 24 months follow-up measured via the Tegner score (0 to 10; higher scores = greater activity): 12 months (MD 0.08, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.55; 122 participants, two studies); 24 months (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.57; 72 participants, two studies). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: There is very low-quality evidence of no difference in self-reported knee function and levels of activity between bioabsorbable and metallic interference screws for graft fixation in ACL reconstruction. There is very low-quality evidence that bioabsorbable screws may be associated with more overall treatment failures, including implant breakage during surgery. Further research does not appear to be a priority, but if undertaken, should also examine costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27450741      PMCID: PMC6458013          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009772.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  46 in total

1.  Interference screw fixation of doubled flexor tendon graft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction - biomechanical evaluation with cyclic elongation.

Authors:  H Nakano; K Yasuda; H Tohyama; M Yamanaka; T Wada; K Kaneda
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.063

2.  Bioscrew fixation of patellar tendon autografts.

Authors:  F A Barber; B F Elrod; D A McGuire; L E Paulos
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 12.479

Review 3.  Noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injuries: risk factors and prevention strategies.

Authors:  L Y Griffin; J Agel; M J Albohm; E A Arendt; R W Dick; W E Garrett; J G Garrick; T E Hewett; L Huston; M L Ireland; R J Johnson; W B Kibler; S Lephart; J L Lewis; T N Lindenfeld; B R Mandelbaum; P Marchak; C C Teitz; E M Wojtys
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2000 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.020

4.  The reliability of a linear analogue for evaluating pain.

Authors:  S I Revill; J O Robinson; M Rosen; M I Hogg
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1976-11       Impact factor: 6.955

5.  A new bioabsorbable interference screw: preliminary results of a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  K P Benedetto; M Fellinger; T E Lim; J M Passler; J L Schoen; W J Willems
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.772

6.  Bioabsorbable interference screws for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  D A McGuire; F A Barber; B F Elrod; L E Paulos
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.772

7.  Development and validation of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form.

Authors:  J J Irrgang; A F Anderson; A L Boland; C D Harner; M Kurosaka; P Neyret; J C Richmond; K D Shelborne
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2001 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  [Transplant fixation by anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Metal vs. bioabsorbable polyglyconate interference screw. A prospective randomized study of 40 patients].

Authors:  W Hackl; C Fink; K P Benedetto; C Hoser
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 1.000

9.  Bioabsorbable polyglyconate interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective computed tomography-controlled study.

Authors:  C Fink; K P Benedetto; W Hackl; C Hoser; M C Freund; M Rieger
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2000 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.772

10.  Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament using poly-L-lactide interference screws or titanium screws: a comparative study.

Authors:  A Kotani; Y Ishii
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.199

View more
  14 in total

1.  Adjustable buttons for ACL graft cortical fixation partially fail with cyclic loading and unloading.

Authors:  J Glasbrenner; C Domnick; M J Raschke; T Willinghöfer; C Kittl; P Michel; D Wähnert; Mirco Herbort
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-10-27       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  ACL hamstring grafts fixed using adjustable cortical suspension in both the femur and tibia demonstrate healing and integration on MRI at one year.

Authors:  Sven Putnis; Thomas Neri; Samuel Grasso; James Linklater; Brett Fritsch; David Parker
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is better than single-bundle reconstruction in terms of objective assessment but not in terms of subjective score.

Authors:  Faisal Ahmed Hashem El-Sherief; Wael Abdelkarim Aldahshan; Yaser Elsayed Wahd; Ashraf Mohamed Abdelaziz; Hany Abdel Gawwad Soliman; Tohamy Goda Hassan; Hassan Fathy Elbehairy; Adel Hamed Awadallah
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Primary stability of single-stage revision reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament in case of failure of dynamic intraligamentary stabilization depends on implant position during ACL repair.

Authors:  B Schliemann; C Kösters; J Glasbrenner; M Fischer; M J Raschke; T Briese; M Müller; E Herbst; C Kittl
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-07-31       Impact factor: 2.928

Review 5.  Anatomic Outside-In Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Using Femoral Fixation with Metallic Interference Screw and Surgical Staples (Agrafe) in the Tibia: An Effective Low-Cost Technique.

Authors:  Ariel de Lima Diego; de Vasconcelos Stemberg Martins; Leite José Alberto Dias; Pinto Dilamar Moreira; Teixeira Rogério Beltrão; de Léo Álvaro Coelho; Silveira Leonardo de Lima; Gonçalves Romeu Krause; Gonçalves Marcelo Carvalho Krause; de Vasconcelos Ana Carolina Leite; Filho Carlos Frederico Dias Costa; de Lima Lana Lacerda
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2017-10-31

6.  Is all-inside with suspensory cortical button fixation a superior technique for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chun-Wei Fu; Wei-Cheng Chen; Yung-Chang Lu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Comparison of efficacy and safety of different fixation devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A Bayesian network meta-analysis protocol.

Authors:  Jiaxin Jin; Liping Yu; Min Wei; Yi Shang; Xin Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.889

8.  Ultrasound-Assisted Endoscopic Removal of Pretibial Cysts Related to Biointerference Screw Degradation.

Authors:  Eirik Solheim; Eivind Inderhaug
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2021-04-12

9.  Anterior cruciate ligament - updating article.

Authors:  Marcus Vinicius Malheiros Luzo; Carlos Eduardo da Silveira Franciozi; Fernando Cury Rezende; Guilherme Conforto Gracitelli; Pedro Debieux; Moisés Cohen
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2016-06-06

10.  Enhancement of tendon-bone interface healing and graft maturation with cylindrical titanium-web (TW) in a miniature swine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: histological and collagen-based analysis.

Authors:  Keisho Ryu; Mitsuru Saito; Daisaburo Kurosaka; Seiichiro Kitasato; Toshiyuki Omori; Hiroteru Hayashi; Tomohiro Kayama; Keishi Marumo
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.