Biocomposite Anchors Research Articles

An Analysis of Technical Aspects of the Arthroscopic Bankart Procedure as Performed in the United States

The purpose of this study was to investigate the intersurgeon variation in technical aspects of performing an arthroscopic Bankart repair. A unique approach with experienced equipment representatives from 3 different arthroscopic companies was used. Experienced representatives were identified by DePuy Mitek, Smith & Nephew, and Arthrex and filled out questionnaires on how their surgeons performed arthroscopic Bankart procedures. This was performed in a blinded fashion with no knowledge of the identities of the specific surgeons or representatives by us. A video on different aspects of the procedure was observed by each representative before filling out the questionnaire to help standardize responses. Data were collected using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture). Data were analyzed as an infrequent observation with 0% to 30% of representatives reporting the observation; sometimes, 31% to 70% reporting the observation; and often, greater than 70% of representatives reporting. Seventy-six percent of representatives had 6 or more years of arthroscopic experience. Forty-three percent of representatives reported that their surgeons use 3 portals for the procedure often. Forty-four percent reported that viewing was performed exclusively from the posterior portal while the surgeon was performing the repair. Seventy-three percent reported that the Hill-Sachs lesion was observed often, and 61% reported that the posterior labrum was evaluated often before the repair. Only 25% of representatives reported that the Bankart lesion was extensively released and mobilized often. Thirty-three percent reported 3 anchors as being used often. Seventy-five percent reported biocomposite anchors as being used often. Single-loaded anchors were reported as being used often by 47%. Eighty-one percent reported that sutures were placed in a simple fashion. Eighty-three percent reported the use of any posterior sutures or anchors for additional plication as infrequent. There is significant variation in performance of the arthroscopic Bankart repair in the United States. Areas of concern include completeness of the diagnostic examination, the adequacy of capsulolabral mobilization, variation in the use of accessory portals, and inconsistent use of additional capsular or labral plication or fixation.

Long-term degradation of poly-lactide co-glycolide/B-tricalcium phosphate biocomposite anchors in arthroscopic repair of Bankart's lesions. A prospective study

Twenty-day-old striped bass (Morone saxatilis) larvae were exposed to a range of treated bleached kraft mill effluent (BKME) concentrations from 0 to 20% effluent by volume (v/v) under continuous flow test conditins. The experimental test concentrations in the 2–20% BKME test aquaria had a BOD5 which ranged from < 1 to 5 mg l−1, TSS 12–17 mg l−1, and true color 35–416 mg l−1. Bleached kraft mill effluent did not kill larvae exposed to it for 20 days through metamorphosis to the juvenile stage. The BKME did not alter growth in length, weight or condition factor in larvae over the 20-day exposure period as determined by multiple regression analysis. A linear regression analysis on the dry weight data at Day 20 only, however, indicated a trend of decreasing weight with increasing BKME concentration. Effluent-exposed larvae also developed normally during the 20-day study. All individuals examined completed the transformation from postlarvae to juveniles by the age of 40 days.

Cyclic Biomechanical Testing of Biocomposite Lateral Row Knotless Anchors in a Human Cadaveric Model

The purpose of this study was to assess the mechanical performance of biocomposite knotless lateral row anchors based on both anchor design and the direction of pull. Two lateral row greater tuberosity insertion sites (anterior and posterior) were identified in matched pairs of fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders DEXA (dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) scanned to verify comparability. The humeri were stripped of all soft tissue and 3 different biocomposite knotless lateral row anchors: HEALIX Knotless BR (DePuy Mitek, Raynham MA), BioComposite PushLock (Arthrex, Naples, FL), and Bio-SwiveLock (Arthrex). Fifty-two anchors were distributed among the insertion locations and tested them with either an anatomic or axial pull. A fixed-gauge loop (15 mm) of 2 high-strength sutures from each anchor was created. After a 10-Nm preload, anchors were cycled from 10 to 45 Nm at 0.5 Hz for 200 cycles and tested to failure at 4.23 mm/second. The load to reach 3 mm and 5 mm displacement, ultimate failure load, displacement at ultimate failure, and failure mode were recorded. Threaded anchors (Bio-SwiveLock, P = .03; HEALIX Knotless, P = .014) showed less displacement with anatomic testing than did the nonthreaded anchor (BioComposite PushLock), and the HEALIX Knotless showed less overall displacement than did the other 2 anchors. The Bio-SwiveLock exhibited greater failure loads than did the other 2 anchors (P < .05). Comparison of axial and anatomic loading showed no maximum load differences for all anchors as a whole (P = .1084). Yet, anatomic pulling produced higher failure loads than did axial pulling for the Bio-SwiveLock but not for the BioComposite PushLock or the HEALIX Knotless. The nonthreaded anchor (BioComposite PushLock) displayed lower failure loads than did both threaded anchors with axial pulling. Threaded biocomposite anchors (HEALIX Knotless BR and Bio-SwiveLock) show less anatomic loading displacement and higher axial failure loads than do the nonthreaded (BioComposite PushLock) anchor. The HEALIX Knotless BR anchor showed less displacement than did the BioComposite PushLock and Bio-SwiveLock anchors. Neither axial nor anatomic loading had an effect on overall anchor displacement. Because of the strength profiles exhibited, this study supports the use of biocomposite anchors, which have definite advantages over polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and metal products. However, the nonthreaded BioComposite PushLock anchor cannot be recommended.

A Biomechanical Comparison of Shoulder Rotation and Cyclic Loading Between Single Row, Triple Loaded Cuff Repairs and Double Row, Suture Tape Cuff Repairs Using Biocomposite Anchors (SS-20)

A Biomechanical Comparison of Shoulder Rotation and Cyclic Loading Between Single Row, Triple Loaded Cuff Repairs and Double Row, Suture Tape Cuff Repairs Using Biocomposite Anchors (SS-20)

Bone Replacement of Fast-Absorbing Biocomposite Anchors in Arthroscopic Shoulder Labral Repairs

Background: Newer generation biocomposite anchors are hypothesized to resorb more reliably and faster, while allowing for bone ingrowth and replacement. Purpose: The purposes of this study were to (1) assess anchor resorption and bone ingrowth over time, (2) identify tunnel widening or potential reactions to the implants, (3) compare imaging findings for different sites of labral repair, and (4) determine patient subjective outcomes with the use of biocomposite anchors in glenoid labral repair. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We enrolled 22 patients to participate in a 24-month outcomes study that included subjective and objective outcome assessments after glenoid labrum repair surgery. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed at 6 and 12 months to identify any potential reactions to implants. Computed tomography (CT) scans were performed at 12 and 24 months to determine anchor resorption and bone ingrowth. Sixteen patients and 47 anchors were available for follow-up at 24 months. An independent, fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologist read the scans. Subjective outcome scores measured at 24 months postoperatively included Simple Shoulder Test, Tegner activity scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder scores. Results: No adverse events were reported with the use of biocomposite anchors at the end of the study period. At 12 and 24 months, respectively, CT scans demonstrated that an estimated 68% and 98% of combined anchor material had been absorbed, 56% and 78% of the anchor material had been replaced by soft tissue of variable density, and 9% and 20% of total anchor volume was replaced by bone. No obvious mechanical failure of the labral repairs was detected on nonarthrogram MRI. Three of the 47 anchors showed bone cyst formation. Tunnel widening (expansion beyond tunnel diameter of 3 mm; 2.9-mm drill hole utilized) was seen in 55% of the anchors but decreased between 12 and 24 months, consistent with bone replacement. Tunnel widening was seen more in anteroinferior and posterior glenoid anchor locations (84% and 57%, respectively) than in superior labral anchors (13%). Subjective outcome scores at 24 months for ASES and UCLA shoulder scores averaged 88 and 30, respectively. All but one patient were satisfied with their outcome at 24 months. Conclusion: Our imaging evaluation indicates resorption of newer generation biocomposite anchors with progressive bone replacement at 12 and 24 months while maintaining acceptable subjective outcomes.