Conventional rotator cuff versus all-suture anchors-A biomechanical study focusing on the insertion angle in an unlimited cyclic model

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 14; no. 11; p. e0225648
• Main Authors: Ntalos, Dimitris, Sellenschloh, Kay, Huber, Gerd, Briem, Daniel, Püschel, Klaus, Morlock, Michael M, Frosch, Karl-Heinz, Fensky, Florian, Klatte, Till Orla
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 27.11.2019; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Arthroscopy; Biology and Life Sciences; Biomechanical Phenomena; Biomechanics; Bone density; Bone Screws; Cadaver; Cadavers; Durapatite; Engineering and Technology; Failure modes; Humans; Humerus - surgery; Implantation; Insertion; Load distribution; Maintenance; Materials Testing; Mechanical properties; Medicine and Health Sciences; Middle Aged; Orthopedic surgery; People and places; Physical Sciences; Plastic surgery; Research and analysis methods; Rotator cuff; Rotator Cuff - surgery; Rotator Cuff Injuries - surgery; Stiffness; Suture Anchors - classification; Suture Anchors - statistics & numerical data; Suture Techniques - instrumentation; Tensile Strength; Young Adult; Germany
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225648

The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of an all-suture anchor to a conventional anchor used commonly in rotator cuff repairs. Furthermore, the biomechanical influence of various implantation angles was evaluated in both anchor types in a human cadaveric model. 30 humeri were allocated into three groups with a similar bone density. The two different anchor types were inserted at a predefined angle of 45°, 90° or 110°. Biomechanical testing included an initial preload of 20N followed by a cyclic protocol with a stepwise increasing force of 0,05N for each cycle at a rate of 1Hz until system failure. Number of cycles, maximum load to failure, stiffness, displacement and failure mode were determined. 27 anchors failed by pullout. There was no significant difference between the conventional and the all-suture anchor regarding mean pullout strength. No considerable discrepancy in stiffness or displacement could be perceived. Comparing the three implantation angles no significant difference could be observed for the all-suture or the conventional anchor. All-suture anchors show similar biomechanical properties to conventional screw shaped anchors in an unlimited cyclic model. The exact insertion angle is not a significant predictor of failure.