Affiliation:
1. Plano Orthopedic and Sports Medicine Center, Plano, Texas, USA
2. Davidson Orthopedics, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
3. Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Abstract
Background: Recently, all-suture, all-inside meniscal repair devices—including devices containing flat sutures or tapes—have been introduced. Similar to those in suture anchors, these modifications may have different performance characteristics than conventional sutures and polyether ether ketone (PEEK)-anchored devices. Purpose: To compare the biomechanical characteristics of all-suture meniscal repair devices with those of a conventional PEEK-anchored device and an inside-out meniscal suture construct. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 48 adult porcine menisci with simulated bucket-handle tears were included. Single-device repairs were performed with the SuperBall Meniscal Repair System, FiberStitch, and FAST-FIX 360 with 2 PEEK anchors, and a vertical mattress inside-out suture repair was performed using a Ti-Cron No. 2-0 braided polyethylene terephthalate suture. All specimens were preloaded (10 N) and cycled 200 times (between 10 and 50 N). Specimens surviving cyclic loading were then destructively tested. Endpoints included maximum failure load, stiffness, cyclic displacement, and failure mode. The goal was 12 successful tests in each group. Metrics between groups were compared using analysis of variance with post hoc tests to control for multiple comparisons. Results: The SuperBall (108.9 N) was significantly stronger than the FAST-FIX 360 (67.3 N) and Ti-Cron (75.2 N), and the FiberStitch (102.8 N) was significantly stronger than the FAST-FIX 360 ( P≤ .01 for all). Cyclic stiffness increased during cyclic loading for all constructs ( P < .001). The Ti-Cron was significantly stiffer than the SuperBall during 5 to 200 cycles ( P < .001). Cyclic displacement significantly increased in all constructs during cycling ( P < .001) but did not differ between devices. Failure mode varied by device: the Ti-Cron repairs failed because of suture breakage, the SuperBall and FAST-FIX 360 failed at the anchor, and the FiberStitch showed both failure modes. Conclusion: The all-suture, all-inside meniscal repair devices demonstrated superior strength to the PEEK-anchored device and the classic inside-out suture meniscal repair but no statistically significant difference in cyclic displacement.