Cargando…

Interference Screws Are Biomechanically Superior to Suture Anchors for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature to evaluate the biomechanical properties of the interference screw (IS) versus suture anchor (SA) techniques for patellar and femoral fixation of medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sequeira, Sean B., Imbergamo, Casey, Gould, Heath P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9402472/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36033175
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2022.05.003
_version_ 1784773185144619008
author Sequeira, Sean B.
Imbergamo, Casey
Gould, Heath P.
author_facet Sequeira, Sean B.
Imbergamo, Casey
Gould, Heath P.
author_sort Sequeira, Sean B.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature to evaluate the biomechanical properties of the interference screw (IS) versus suture anchor (SA) techniques for patellar and femoral fixation of medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Embase using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify studies that analyzed the biomechanical properties of IS and SA techniques for MPFL reconstruction. The search phrase implemented was “medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction biomechanics.” Evaluated outcomes included ultimate load to failure (N), stiffness (N/mm), and mode of failure. Forest plots were created for statistical analysis and heterogeneity was assessed via I(2) statistic. RESULTS: Six studies met inclusion criteria, including a total of 108 cadaveric specimens, for MPFL patellar fixation, and 3 studies met inclusion criteria, including a total of 50 cadaveric specimens, for MPFL femoral fixation. Pooled analysis from 5 studies reporting on stiffness for MPFL patellar fixation revealed a statistically significant difference in favor of IS compared with SA (P = .007). Pooled analysis from 3 studies reporting on ultimate load to failure of femoral fixation revealed a statistically significant difference in favor of IS compared with SA (P = .043). CONCLUSIONS: The use of IS was associated with a greater stiffness compared with the use of SA in MPFL patellar fixation, but there was no difference in load to failure between IS and SA. The use of IS was associated with a greater load to failure compared with the use of SA in MPFL femoral fixation, but there was no difference in stiffness between IS and SA. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There have been multiple individual biomechanical studies conducted comparing IS and SA fixation for MPFL patellar and femoral fixation; however, they have yielded conflicting results, with small sample sizes. Pooling the data from these studies in a meta-analysis may allow for more meaningful biomechanical data to coincide with the existing, albeit scarce, clinical data, this may help to inform clinical decision making for surgeons managing these injuries.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9402472
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94024722022-08-26 Interference Screws Are Biomechanically Superior to Suture Anchors for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Sequeira, Sean B. Imbergamo, Casey Gould, Heath P. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Meta-Analysis PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature to evaluate the biomechanical properties of the interference screw (IS) versus suture anchor (SA) techniques for patellar and femoral fixation of medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Embase using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify studies that analyzed the biomechanical properties of IS and SA techniques for MPFL reconstruction. The search phrase implemented was “medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction biomechanics.” Evaluated outcomes included ultimate load to failure (N), stiffness (N/mm), and mode of failure. Forest plots were created for statistical analysis and heterogeneity was assessed via I(2) statistic. RESULTS: Six studies met inclusion criteria, including a total of 108 cadaveric specimens, for MPFL patellar fixation, and 3 studies met inclusion criteria, including a total of 50 cadaveric specimens, for MPFL femoral fixation. Pooled analysis from 5 studies reporting on stiffness for MPFL patellar fixation revealed a statistically significant difference in favor of IS compared with SA (P = .007). Pooled analysis from 3 studies reporting on ultimate load to failure of femoral fixation revealed a statistically significant difference in favor of IS compared with SA (P = .043). CONCLUSIONS: The use of IS was associated with a greater stiffness compared with the use of SA in MPFL patellar fixation, but there was no difference in load to failure between IS and SA. The use of IS was associated with a greater load to failure compared with the use of SA in MPFL femoral fixation, but there was no difference in stiffness between IS and SA. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There have been multiple individual biomechanical studies conducted comparing IS and SA fixation for MPFL patellar and femoral fixation; however, they have yielded conflicting results, with small sample sizes. Pooling the data from these studies in a meta-analysis may allow for more meaningful biomechanical data to coincide with the existing, albeit scarce, clinical data, this may help to inform clinical decision making for surgeons managing these injuries. Elsevier 2022-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9402472/ /pubmed/36033175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2022.05.003 Text en © 2022 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Meta-Analysis
Sequeira, Sean B.
Imbergamo, Casey
Gould, Heath P.
Interference Screws Are Biomechanically Superior to Suture Anchors for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Interference Screws Are Biomechanically Superior to Suture Anchors for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Interference Screws Are Biomechanically Superior to Suture Anchors for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Interference Screws Are Biomechanically Superior to Suture Anchors for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Interference Screws Are Biomechanically Superior to Suture Anchors for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Interference Screws Are Biomechanically Superior to Suture Anchors for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort interference screws are biomechanically superior to suture anchors for medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Meta-Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9402472/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36033175
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2022.05.003
work_keys_str_mv AT sequeiraseanb interferencescrewsarebiomechanicallysuperiortosutureanchorsformedialpatellofemoralligamentreconstructionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT imbergamocasey interferencescrewsarebiomechanicallysuperiortosutureanchorsformedialpatellofemoralligamentreconstructionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gouldheathp interferencescrewsarebiomechanicallysuperiortosutureanchorsformedialpatellofemoralligamentreconstructionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis