Interpositional Bioresorbable Scaffold-Anchor Appears Non-inferior to a Standard Anchor in the Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopedics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-26 DOI:10.3928/01477447-20241219-02
Nathan Angerett, Leighann Krasney, Rex Lutz, Timothy Maurer, Scott Michelitch, Albert Lin, Matthew Kelly
{"title":"Interpositional Bioresorbable Scaffold-Anchor Appears Non-inferior to a Standard Anchor in the Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears.","authors":"Nathan Angerett, Leighann Krasney, Rex Lutz, Timothy Maurer, Scott Michelitch, Albert Lin, Matthew Kelly","doi":"10.3928/01477447-20241219-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Failure after rotator cuff repair is typically due to a loss of integrity of the bone-tendon interface. The BioWick anchor (Zimmer-Biomet) is an interpositional scaffold-anchor that was developed to improve tendon-bone healing. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical efficacy of this novel anchor compared with a standard anchor with respect to retear rates and patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We enrolled 99 patients in a double-anonymized, prospective, randomized controlled trial who underwent rotator cuff repair. Fifty patients were randomized to the novel anchor group and 49 patients were randomized to the standard anchor group. The primary outcome was rotator cuff repair integrity assessed via ultrasound at 6 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), strength, and active range of motion (AROM) assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 3 and 6 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no statistically significant differences in demographic data, mean rotator cuff tear size, tobacco use, workers' compensation status, or operative side between the groups. At 6-month follow-up, the retear rate was 22% (n=9) for the novel anchor group vs 23% (n=10) for the standard anchor group (<i>P</i>=.8864). Secondary outcomes, including VAS pain score, ASES score, SST, strength, and AROM measurements, did not differ significantly between the groups at 3- or 6-month follow-up. There were no complications identified in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study did not demonstrate superior clinical improvements or decreased retear rates with the use of this novel anchor compared with a standard anchor. [<i>Orthopedics</i>. 2025;48(1):e33-e39.].</p>","PeriodicalId":19631,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedics","volume":" ","pages":"e33-e39"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20241219-02","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Failure after rotator cuff repair is typically due to a loss of integrity of the bone-tendon interface. The BioWick anchor (Zimmer-Biomet) is an interpositional scaffold-anchor that was developed to improve tendon-bone healing. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical efficacy of this novel anchor compared with a standard anchor with respect to retear rates and patient outcomes.

Materials and methods: We enrolled 99 patients in a double-anonymized, prospective, randomized controlled trial who underwent rotator cuff repair. Fifty patients were randomized to the novel anchor group and 49 patients were randomized to the standard anchor group. The primary outcome was rotator cuff repair integrity assessed via ultrasound at 6 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), strength, and active range of motion (AROM) assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 3 and 6 months.

Results: There were no statistically significant differences in demographic data, mean rotator cuff tear size, tobacco use, workers' compensation status, or operative side between the groups. At 6-month follow-up, the retear rate was 22% (n=9) for the novel anchor group vs 23% (n=10) for the standard anchor group (P=.8864). Secondary outcomes, including VAS pain score, ASES score, SST, strength, and AROM measurements, did not differ significantly between the groups at 3- or 6-month follow-up. There were no complications identified in either group.

Conclusion: This study did not demonstrate superior clinical improvements or decreased retear rates with the use of this novel anchor compared with a standard anchor. [Orthopedics. 2025;48(1):e33-e39.].

在治疗肩袖撕裂时,插入式生物可吸收支架锚不逊于标准锚。
背景:肌腱套修复后的失败通常是由于骨-肌腱界面完整性的丧失。BioWick锚(zimmero - biomet)是一种用于促进肌腱-骨愈合的间置支架锚。本研究的目的是确定与标准锚相比,这种新型锚的临床疗效,并将其与恢复率和患者预后进行比较。材料和方法:我们在一项双匿名、前瞻性、随机对照试验中招募了99例接受肩袖修复的患者。50例患者随机分为新型锚定组,49例患者随机分为标准锚定组。主要结果是术后6个月通过超声评估肩袖修复完整性。次要结果包括视觉模拟评分(VAS)疼痛评分,美国肩关节外科医生(ASES)评分,简单肩部测试(SST),术前和术后3个月和6个月的力量和活动范围(AROM)评估。结果:两组患者在人口统计学数据、平均肩袖撕裂大小、吸烟情况、工伤赔偿状况、手术侧等方面均无统计学差异。在6个月的随访中,新型锚定组的恢复率为22% (n=9),而标准锚定组的恢复率为23% (n=10) (P=.8864)。次要结果,包括VAS疼痛评分、as评分、SST、强度和AROM测量,在3个月或6个月的随访中,两组之间没有显著差异。两组均未发现并发症。结论:与标准锚钉相比,本研究并没有证明使用这种新型锚钉有更好的临床改善或降低再入率。[矫形手术。202 x; 4 x (x): xx-xx。]。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Orthopedics
Orthopedics 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
160
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: For over 40 years, Orthopedics, a bimonthly peer-reviewed journal, has been the preferred choice of orthopedic surgeons for clinically relevant information on all aspects of adult and pediatric orthopedic surgery and treatment. Edited by Robert D''Ambrosia, MD, Chairman of the Department of Orthopedics at the University of Colorado, Denver, and former President of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, as well as an Editorial Board of over 100 international orthopedists, Orthopedics is the source to turn to for guidance in your practice. The journal offers access to current articles, as well as several years of archived content. Highlights also include Blue Ribbon articles published full text in print and online, as well as Tips & Techniques posted with every issue.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信