Assessments of activities of daily living after arthroscopic SLAP repair with knot-tying versus knotless suture anchors

Fixation devices for anterior shoulder instability

PURPOSE

Over the past 40 years, advances in the development of anchors and sutures have contributed to the improvement in surgical outcomes for treatment of shoulder instability. Important choices in surgery when treating instability include the use of knotless versus knotted suture anchors, and bony versus soft tissue reconstruction techniques.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted to evaluate the history of instability of the shoulder and the results of specific fixation techniques including bony and soft tissue reconstructions as well as knotted and knotless suture anchors.

RESULTS

As knotless suture anchors have continued to grow in popularity since their development in 2001, many studies have compared this newer technique to that of the standard knotted suture anchors. In general, these studies have demonstrated no difference in patient-reported outcome measures between the two options. Additionally, the choice of bony versus soft tissue reconstructions is patient specific as it depends on the specific pathology or combination of injuries.

CONCLUSION

In each surgery performed for shoulder instability, it is vitally important that we try to restore normal anatomy. The normal anatomy is best established by knotted mattress sutures. However, loop laxity and tear through by the sutures in the capsule can eliminate this restoration, increasing risk of failure. Knotless anchors may allow better soft tissue fixation of the labrum and capsule to the glenoid, but without complete restoration of normal anatomy.

Combined Bankart and SLAP repair: patient-reported outcome measurements after a minimum 5-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Anterior shoulder instability is typically characterized by detachment of the anteroinferior labrum (Bankart lesion). Some patients also sustain a superior labrum anterior-to-posterior (SLAP) injury. The purpose of this study was to compare the medium-term clinical results of isolated anterior Bankart repairs (ABR) with those of combined Bankart and SLAP repair (ABR + SLAP).

METHODS

Data on all patients treated surgically for recurrent anterior shoulder instability between 2006 and 2011 were retrospectively collected from medical charts. The minimum follow-up was 5 years. Patients were interviewed to assess patient-reported outcome measurements (PROM) as determined by the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (ASES), the Subjective Shoulder Score (SSV), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Score (DASH), as well as their quality of life (QOL: SF12 questionnaire). Information on complications, re-operations, and recurrent instability was recorded and evaluated as well.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients (88% males) with a mean age 23.7 years (range 15-40) were included. Forty-two patients following ABR + SLAP repair were compared to 108 patients following ABR alone, with a mean follow-up of 7.8 years (range 5-10.7). The rate of re-dislocation was similar in both groups (26% for ABR + SLAP vs 20% for ABR, p = .44). There were no significant differences in functional outcome between the ABR + SLAP and the ABR alone groups (SSV 86.7 vs 86.5, p = .93, ASES 89.6 vs 86.5, p = .11, and DASH 4.9 vs 7, p = .17), or in QOL outcome (SF12 physical 95.6 vs 93.3, p = .27, SF12 mental 84.4 vs 85.7, p = .63).

CONCLUSION

Surgical repair for anterior shoulder instability and a coexisting SLAP lesion yields clinical results as good as those of isolated ABR, as evidenced by similar PROM and re-dislocation rates after medium-term follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Knotted Versus Knotless Anchors for Labral Repair in the Shoulder: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To compare biomechanical and clinical outcomes between knotless and knotted anchors in arthroscopic labral repair, specifically in (1) Bankart repair, (2) SLAP repair, (3) posterior labral repair, and (4) remplissage augmentation of Bankart repair.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to find biomechanical and clinical studies comparing knotted and knotless anchors using the search term "knotless anchor."

RESULTS

Overall, 17 studies met inclusion criteria. There were 7 studies evaluating the biomechanical outcomes, of which 5 found mixed results between knotted and knotless anchors for arthroscopic Bankart repair, 1 demonstrated a difference for SLAP repair favoring knotless anchors, and 2 showed no significant difference for Remplissage in terms of ultimate load-to-failure. Four studies evaluated knotless labral anchors compared with knotted anchors in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair with no significant differences in outcomes reported between the 2 anchor types, except in one study that found an improved visual analog scale score and a lower recurrence and revision rate with knotted anchors. Five studies evaluated knotless anchors compared with knotted anchors in patients undergoing SLAP repair, and none of the included studies found any significant differences in the patient reported outcome measures or revision rates. Of the 5 studies comparing operative time, 4 found a reduced time with knotless anchors.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical results show no significant differences in outcomes between knotless and knotted anchors for labral repair in the shoulder, including Bankart repair, SLAP repair, and posterior labral repair. However, there was conflicting evidence supporting knotless or knotted anchors in the biomechanical studies. However, operative times may be reduced with the use of knotless anchors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, A Systematic Review of Level II and III studies.

Safety and Performance of Titanium Suture Anchors Used in Knee Ligament Repair Procedures

Injuries to the knee ligaments can be particularly disabling in young patients, given the risk of long-term disability if adequate fixation is not achieved during initial repair. The TWINFIX™ titanium (Ti) suture anchor with ULTRABRAID™ Suture (Smith and Nephew, London, UK) was designed to secure tendon and ligament reconstructions with increased boney ingrowth at the anchor site with minimal invasive technique. This retrospective analysis looked at 33 patients (41 implants) operated with this device between 2015 and 2019 at a single institution. The average age of patients was 33.18 years (standard deviation [SD], 15.26), with an average body mass index of 24.88 (SD, 3.49). The indications were lateral extra-articular tenodesis during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction, quadriceps or patellar tendon repair and medial collateral ligament repair. After an average follow up of 24.3 + 6.53 months, there was no reports of clinical failure or radiographic evidence of implant failure or loosening. One patient experienced a complication unrelated to the study device, requiring manipulation under anesthesia with resolution of symptoms. This case series supports the safety and performance of this implants for the knee procedures in which its use is indicated. Additional follow-up will be required to determine whether these effects are sustained at medium- and long-term durations.

Prospective Analysis of Arthroscopic Hip Anatomic Labral Repair Utilizing Knotless Suture Anchor Technology: The Controlled-Tension Anatomic Technique at Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Labral tears are the most common abnormalities in patients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery. Appropriate management is crucial, as it has been shown that better overall outcomes can be achieved with labral restoration.

PURPOSE

To report the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at minimum 2-year follow-up of patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for labral tear repair using the knotless controlled-tension anatomic technique in the setting of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected for patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS for labral tear repair using the knotless controlled-tension anatomic technique. Patients were excluded if they had prior hip conditions, prior ipsilateral surgery, Tönnis grade >1, a lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) <25°, or workers' compensation claims. Preoperative and postoperative scores at minimum 2-year follow-up were recorded for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. The proportion of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) or patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the mHHS, HOS-SSS, and iHOT-12 were also reported.

RESULTS

A total of 309 hips were included. The mean patient age was 36.2 years (range, 12.8-75.9 years). The mean preoperative LCEA and alpha angle were 31.9° and 57.1°, respectively. A significant improvement on the mHHS (62.6 ± 15.7 preoperatively vs 86.9 ± 16.2 at 2-year follow-up), NAHS (63.1 ± 16.7 vs 86.1 ± 16.7), and HOS-SSS (39.8 ± 22.0 vs 74.2 ± 27.3) was found (P < .001 for all). A significant decrease was shown for VAS scores (P < .001). Also, 78.6% and 82.2% of patients achieved the MCID and PASS for the mHHS, respectively; 60.8% and 69.9% of patients met the MCID and PASS for the HOS-SSS, respectively; and the MCID for the iHOT-12 was met by 77.3% of patients.

CONCLUSION

In the setting of FAIS and labral tears, patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for labral tear repair using the knotless controlled-tension anatomic technique demonstrated significant improvement in several validated PRO measures, the VAS pain score, and patient satisfaction at a minimum 2 years of follow-up. Based on this evidence, labral tear repair using the knotless controlled-tension anatomic technique seems to be a safe option.