Dasari Suhas P, Vadhera Amar S, Menendez Mariano E, Khan Zeeshan A, Inoue Nozomu, Shewman Elizabeth, Waterman Brian R, Garrigues Grant E, Cole Brian J, Verma Nikhil N
Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
JSES Int. 2023 Jul 3;8(3):451-458. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.005. eCollection 2024 May.
The goals of this study were to optimize superior capsular reconstruction by assessing the relative fixation strength of 4 suture anchors; evaluating 3 glenoid neck locations for fixation strength and bone mineral density (BMD); determining if there is a correlation between BMD and fixation strength; and determining which portal sites have optimal access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck for anchor placement.
Twenty cadaveric specimens were randomized into 4 groups: all-suture anchor (FiberTak), conventional 3.0-mm knotless suture anchor (SutureTak), 3.9-mm knotless PEEK (polyetheretherketone) Corkscrew anchor, and 4.5-mm Bio-Corkscrew anchor. Each specimen was prepared with 3 anchors into the glenoid: an anterosuperior anchor, superior anchor, and posterosuperior anchor. All anchors were inserted into the superior glenoid neck 5 mm from the glenoid rim. A materials testing system performed cyclic testing (250 cycles) followed by load-to-failure testing at 12.5 mm/s. Cyclic elongation, first cycle excursion, maximum load, and stiffness were recorded. Using custom software, BMD was calculated at each anchor location. This software was also used to assess access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck from standard arthroscopic portal positions.
There was no significant difference in cyclic elongation ( = .546), first cycle excursion ( = .476), maximum load ( = .817), or stiffness ( = .309) among glenoid anchor positions. Cyclic elongation was significantly longer in the PEEK Corkscrew group relative to the other implants ( ≤ .002). First cycle excursion was significantly greater in the FiberTak group relative to all other implants ( ≤ .008). For load-to-failure testing, the Bio-Corkscrew group achieved the highest maximum load ( ≤ .001). No other differences in cyclic or failure testing were observed between the groups. No differences in stiffness testing were observed ( = .133). The superior glenoid rim had the greatest BMD ( = .003), but there was no correlation between BMD and cyclic/load outcomes. The posterior portal (80% of specimens) and the anterior portal (60% of specimens) demonstrated the best access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck, respectively.
The 4.5-mm Bio-Corkscrew anchor provided the most robust fixation to the glenoid during superior capsular reconstruction as it demonstrated the strongest maximum load, had minimal elongation, had minimal first cycle excursion, and did not fail during cyclic testing. The superior glenoid neck had the highest BMD; however, there was no correlation between BMD or glenoid anchor location and biomechanical outcomes. The posterior portal and anterior portal provided optimal access to the posterosuperior glenoid neck and anterosuperior glenoid neck, respectively.
本研究的目的是通过评估4种缝线锚钉的相对固定强度;评估3个关节盂颈部位置的固定强度和骨密度(BMD);确定BMD与固定强度之间是否存在相关性;以及确定哪些入路部位对关节盂后上和前上颈部进行锚钉置入具有最佳的显露,来优化上盂唇重建。
将20个尸体标本随机分为4组:全缝线锚钉(FiberTak)、传统3.0mm无结缝线锚钉(SutureTak)、3.9mm无结聚醚醚酮(PEEK)螺旋锚钉和4.5mm生物螺旋锚钉。每个标本在关节盂中置入3枚锚钉:前上锚钉、上锚钉和后上锚钉。所有锚钉均插入距关节盂边缘5mm的关节盂上颈部。使用材料测试系统进行循环测试(250次循环),然后以12.5mm/s的速度进行破坏载荷测试。记录循环伸长、第一循环偏移、最大载荷和刚度。使用定制软件计算每个锚钉位置的BMD。该软件还用于评估从标准关节镜入路位置对关节盂后上和前上颈部的显露。
关节盂锚钉位置之间在循环伸长(P = 0.546)、第一循环偏移(P = 0.476)、最大载荷(P = 0.817)或刚度(P = 0.309)方面无显著差异。相对于其他植入物,PEEK螺旋锚钉组的循环伸长明显更长(P≤0.002)。相对于所有其他植入物,FiberTak组的第一循环偏移明显更大(P≤0.008)。对于破坏载荷测试,生物螺旋锚钉组达到了最高的最大载荷(P≤0.001)。各组之间在循环或破坏测试中未观察到其他差异。在刚度测试中未观察到差异(P = 0.133)。关节盂上缘的BMD最大(P = 0.003),但BMD与循环/载荷结果之间无相关性。后入路(80%的标本)和前入路(60%的标本)分别显示对关节盂后上和前上颈部的显露最佳。
在进行上盂唇重建时,4.5mm生物螺旋锚钉对关节盂提供了最可靠的固定,因为它显示出最强的最大载荷,伸长最小,第一循环偏移最小,并且在循环测试中未失效。关节盂上颈部的BMD最高;然而,BMD或关节盂锚钉位置与生物力学结果之间无相关性。后入路和前入路分别为关节盂后上颈部和前上颈部提供了最佳的显露。