Clinical Effect of Suture Anchor and Double-Pulley Technique in the Treatment of Inferior Patellar Fracture

Objective. To evaluate the efficacy of suture anchor combined with double-pulley technique for subpatellar comminuted fractures compared with wire vertical suture and Krachow in the treatment of subpatellar fractures. Methods. Retrospectively selected 48 patients with subpatellar pole comminuted fracture admitted in our hospital from February 2013 to July 2019, 25 patients with double-pulley technique (group A), and 23 patients with vertical wire suture with Krachow suture. Patient age, gender, AT/OTA typing, injury mechanism, follow-up time, surgical time, bleeding volume, mean fracture healing time, and postoperative complications were recorded. The Insall-Salvati index immediately and 6 weeks after surgery. Bostman scores and knee activity were recorded at each follow-up, and month 12 was taken as the final result. Results. Time of surgery in group A (46.52 min) was significantly shorter than in group B (76.30 min). Intraoperative bleeding in group 15.1 ml, B, group 15.9 ml. Both incisions healed in stage I, averaging clinical healing of patella fracture within 10 weeks. There was no significant difference in mean Bostman score and knee activity at month 12 (group A: 28.4, 124.8°; group B: 28.1, 125.7°). There was no significant statistical difference in the Insall-Salvati index immediately or 6 weeks between the two groups. Group B patients had two wire fractures, fracture healing and the wire removed one year after surgery, and the remaining patients had no complications such as internal fixation loosening, fracture, delayed healing, or nonhealing of fracture. Conclusion. Compared with the treatment of subpatellar fracture with wire vertical suture and Krachow method, suture anchor with double-pulley technique has short operation time, reliable fixation, and less complications. Patients can have early functional exercise and good knee function recovery without secondary surgery. It can be considered as an alternative therapy for this fracture and deserves clinical adoption and promotion.

Download Full-text

A Modified Method to Treat Severe Asymptomatic Pre-existing Degeneration of Adjacent Segment: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-70798/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Xinliang Zhang ◽

Jinwen Zhu ◽

Yibing Li ◽

Dingjun Hao ◽

Wenjie Gao

Keyword(s):

Interbody Fusion ◽

Operation Time ◽

Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽

Adjacent Segment ◽

Retrospective Case ◽

Modified Method ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Group A ◽

Group B

Abstract Background: Pre-existing degeneration of adjacent segment is an important risk factor for adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), but limited and controversial studies have addressed its management.Methods: Patients with symptomatic degeneration of the L5/S1 segment warranting surgical interference and severe asymptomatic degeneration of the L4/5 segment were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, those who underwent interbody fusion in the causative (L5/S1) segment and distraction of the intervertebral space and facet fusion in the adjacent L4/5 segment were included as Group A (n=103). Patients who underwent interbody fusion in both L5/S1 and L4/5 segments were included as Group B (n=81). Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated.Results: Mean follow-up was 58.5 months (range, 48-75 m). No significant difference in clinical outcomes or the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in L3/4 segment was found between Groups A and B. Compared with Group B, less bleeding (315±84 vs. 532±105 ml), shorter operation time (107±34 vs. 158±55 min) and lower costs (13,830±2640 vs. 16,020±3380 US$) were found in Group A (P<0.05). In Group A, disc height ratio (DHR) of L4/5 segment was significantly increased from preoperative value of 0.40±0.13 to last follow-up value of 0.53±0.18 (P<0.05), while the degree of canal stenosis (DCS) was decreased from preoperative value of 34.3±11.2% to last follow-up value of 15.9±9.3% (P<0.05). Conclusions: This modified method could be effective in treating severe asymptomatic pre-existing degeneration of adjacent segment in lumbar spine.

Download Full-text

A Comparison of the Bridge-type ROI-C Interbody Fusion Cage System and Titanium Mesh Graft With Titanium Plate Fixation in 2-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With Plating and Cage System: A Retrospective Study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-48049/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Shuangjun He ◽

Zhangzhe Zhou ◽

Xiaofeng Shao ◽

Changhao Zhang ◽

Xinfeng Zhou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Interbody Fusion ◽

Operation Time ◽

Fusion Rate ◽

Cage System ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Group A ◽

Bridge Type ◽

Group B ◽

Fusion Cage

Abstract Objective To explore the clinical efficacy and radioactive results of the bridge-type ROI-C interbody fusion cage (ROI-C) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with plating and cage system (ACDF) for cervical spondylopathy. Methods From January 2014 to January 2018, 45 patients undergoing ACDF were retrospectively analyzed, including 24 cases of ROI-C (group A) and 21 cases of ACDF (group B). The operation time, blood loss, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (JOA), postoperative complications, imaging results including cervical Cobb angle and fusion were compared between groups. Results All patients were successfully treated with surgery, and no cerebrospinal fluid leakage, esophageal fistula, or hoarseness occurred after surgery. The operation time and blood loss in group A were lower than those in group B (P < 0.05). During the follow-up period, JOA score increased and NDI score decreased after operation (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between the groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of dysphagia in group A was lower than that in group B at 1 month and 3 months after operation (P < 0.05), but the final follow-up results showed that there was no significant difference in the incidence of dysphagia between the two groups (P > 0.05). In group A, the fusion rate was 83.3% 3 months after surgery and 100% at the last follow-up. The rate of adjacent level ossification development was 12.5%. In group B, the fusion rate was 85.7% 3 months after surgery and 100% at the last follow-up. The rate of adjacent level ossification development was 23.8%. Conclusion Both ROI-C and ACDF can achieve satisfactory results, but ROI-C has shorter operation time, less bleeding and lower incidence of dysphagia in the short term.

Download Full-text

A modified method to treat severe asymptomatic pre‐existing degeneration of adjacent segment: a retrospective case‐control study

BMC Surgery ◽

10.1186/s12893-021-01163-w ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Xinliang Zhang ◽

Jinwen Zhu ◽

Yibing Li ◽

Dingjun Hao ◽

Wenjie Gao

Keyword(s):

Interbody Fusion ◽

Operation Time ◽

Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽

Adjacent Segment ◽

Retrospective Case ◽

Modified Method ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Group A ◽

Group B

Abstract Background Pre-existing degeneration of adjacent segment is an important risk factor for adjacent-segment degeneration (ASD), but only limited and controversial studies have addressed its management. Methods We retrospectively analyzed patients with symptomatic degeneration of the L5/S1 segment warranting surgical interference and severe asymptomatic degeneration of the L4/5 segment. Of these patients, those who underwent interbody fusion of the causative (L5/S1) segment and distraction of the intervertebral space and facet fusion of the adjacent L4/5 segment were included in Group A (n = 103), while those who underwent interbody fusion of both the L5/S1 and L4/5 segments were included in Group B (n = 81). Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated. Results Mean follow-up time was 58.5 months (range, 48–75 months). We found no significant difference in clinical outcomes or incidence of ASD in the L3/4 segment between Groups A and B. Compared with Group B, Group A experienced less bleeding (315 ± 84 ml vs. 532 ± 105 ml), shorter operation time (107 ± 34 min vs. 158 ± 55 min) and lower costs (US $13,830 ± $2640 vs. US $16,020 ± $3380; P < 0.05). In Group A, the disc height ratio (DHR) of the L4/5 segment was significantly increased from a preoperative value of 0.40 ± 0.13 to a last–follow-up value of 0.53 ± 0.18 (P < 0.05), while the degree of canal stenosis (DCS) was decreased from a preoperative value of 34.3 ± 11.2% to a last–follow-up value of 15.9 ± 9.3 % (P < 0.05). Conclusions This modified method could be effective in treating severe asymptomatic pre-existing degeneration of adjacent segment in the lumbar spine.

Download Full-text

External fixator combined with three different fixation methods of fibula for treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula: a retrospective study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-29918/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

DongDong Sun ◽

Dan Lv ◽

Kun Zhou ◽

Jian Chen ◽

Li-Lan Gao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Fracture Healing ◽

External Fixator ◽

Distal Tibia ◽

Operation Time ◽

Healing Time ◽

Open Fractures ◽

Group A ◽

Group B ◽

Ankle Function

Abstract Background To compare the efficacy of three different fixation methods of fibula combined with external fixation of tibia for the treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula. Methods From January 2017 to July 2019, 91 cases of open fractures of distal tibia and fibula were treated with external fixator, and the fibula was fixed with non-fixation (group A, n=35), plate-screw (group B, n=30) and Kirschner wire(group C, n=26).The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, surgical and implants costs, fracture healing time, postoperative complications, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle surgery (AOFAS) scores were compared among the groups. Results Four patients were lost to follow-up, and 87 patients were followed up for 5-35 months (average, 14.2 months). The operation time of group C(114.92±36.09min) was shorter than that of group A (142.27±47.05min) and group B(184.00±48.56min) (P<0.05). There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss among the three groups (P>0.05). The surgical and implants costs in group C (5.24±1.21, thousand dollars) is lower than that in group A (6.48±1.11, thousand dollars) and group B (9.37±2.16, thousand dollars) (P < 0.05).The fracture healing time of group C(5.67±1.42months) was significantly less than that of group A (6.90±1.33months) and group B(6.70±1.12months) (P<0.05). The postoperative complications such as fractures delayed union and nonunion in group C (2 cases, 8.00%) is less than that in group A (13 cases, 39.39%) and group B (11cases, 37.93%) (P<0.05). The wound infection and needle-tract infection did not differ among the three groups (P>0.05). The excellent or good rate of ankle function was 69.70% in group A, 72.41% in group B and 84.00% in group C, with no statistical difference among the three groups (P>0.05). conclusion Compared with simple external fixator fixation and external fixator combined with plate-screw osteosynthesis, external fixator combined with K-wire intramedullary fixation shortens the operative time and fracture healing time, reduced costs and complications of fracture healing, while the blood loss, infection complications and ankle function recovery showed no difference with the other two groups. External fixator combined with plate-screw osteosynthesis had no advantage in treating extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula when compared with simple external fixation.

Download Full-text

External fixator combined with three different fixation methods of fibula for treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula: a retrospective study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-29918/v3 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

DongDong Sun ◽

Dan Lv ◽

Kun Zhou ◽

Jian Chen ◽

Li-Lan Gao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Fracture Healing ◽

External Fixator ◽

Distal Tibia ◽

Operation Time ◽

Healing Time ◽

Open Fractures ◽

Group A ◽

Group B ◽

Ankle Function

Abstract Background To compare the efficacy of three different fixation methods of fibula combined with external fixation of tibia for the treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula. Methods From January 2017 to July 2019, 91 cases of open fractures of distal tibia and fibula were treated with external fixator, and the fibula was fixed with non-fixation (group A, n=35), plate-screw (group B, n=30) and Kirschner wire(group C, n=26).The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, surgical and implants costs, fracture healing time, postoperative complications, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle surgery (AOFAS) scores were compared among the groups. Results Four patients were lost to follow-up, and 87 patients were followed up for 5-35 months (average, 14.2 months). The operation time of group C(114.92±36.09min) was shorter than that of group A (142.27±47.05min) and group B(184.00±48.56min) (P<0.05). There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss among the three groups (P>0.05). The surgical and implants costs in group C (5.24±1.21, thousand dollars) is lower than that in group A (6.48±1.11, thousand dollars) and group B (9.37±2.16, thousand dollars) (P < 0.05).The fracture healing time of group C(5.67±1.42months) was significantly less than that of group A (6.90±1.33months) and group B(6.70±1.12months) (P<0.05). The postoperative complications such as fractures delayed union and nonunion in group C (2 cases, 8.00%) is less than that in group A (13 cases, 39.39%) and group B (11cases, 37.93%) (P<0.05). The wound infection and needle-tract infection did not differ among the three groups (P>0.05). The excellent or good rate of ankle function was 69.70% in group A, 72.41% in group B and 84.00% in group C, with no statistical difference among the three groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Compared with simple external fixator fixation and external fixator combined with plate-screw osteosynthesis, external fixator combined with K-wire intramedullary fixation shortens the operative time and fracture healing time, reduced costs and complications of fracture healing, while the blood loss, infection complications and ankle function recovery showed no difference with the other two groups. External fixator combined with plate-screw osteosynthesis had no advantage in treating extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula when compared with simple external fixation.Fund program: National Natural Science Foundation of China (11572222)

Download Full-text

Surgical management of consecutive multisegment thoracic and lumbar tuberculosis: anterior-only approach vs. posterior-only approach.

10.21203/rs.3.rs-30950/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Chen Zhao ◽

Lei Luo ◽

Liehua Liu ◽

Pei Li ◽

Lichuan Liang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Loss Rate ◽

Deformity Correction ◽

Operation Time ◽

Clinical Results ◽

Surgery Group ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Functional Scores ◽

Group A ◽

Group B

Abstract Purpose: To compare the efficacy, safety, and technical characteristics of anterior-only and posterior-only approach surgeries for the treatment of consecutive multisegment thoracic and lumbar tuberculosis.Methods: Thirty-five patients who developed consecutive multisegment thoracic and lumbar tuberculosis from September 2012 to May 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Group A was the posterior-only surgery group, and group B was the anterior-only surgery group. The data on the surgery, deformity correction, functional scores and complications were compared between the two groups.Results: There was no significant difference in the operation time or blood loss between groups A and B (P>0.05). The preoperative average Cobb angle of kyphosis in groups A and B were 36.2±15.2° and 27.9±7.7°, respectively, which significantly decreased to 4.9±11.8° and 10.4±5.6° after the operation, respectively (P<0.05). At the final follow-up, the angles were 7.1±10.5° and 14.6±8.0°, respectively. The correction angle and correction rate in group A (31.3±16.6°, 88.6±43.6%) were greater than those in group B (17.5±4.4°, 64.9±14.0%) (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the loss angle between groups A and B (P>0.05), but the loss rate in group B (24.0±27.8%) was higher than that in group A (9.6±10.2%) (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion: The posterior-only and anterior-only approaches can lead to satisfactory clinical results in the treatment of patients with consecutive multisegment thoracic and lumbar tuberculosis. With posterior-only surgery, kyphosis can be better corrected, and the correction can be better maintained than with anterior-only surgery.

Download Full-text

External fixator combined with three different fixation methods of fibula for treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula: a retrospective study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-29918/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

DongDong Sun ◽

Dan Lv ◽

Kun Zhou ◽

Jian Chen ◽

Li-Lan Gao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Fracture Healing ◽

External Fixator ◽

Distal Tibia ◽

Operation Time ◽

Healing Time ◽

Open Fractures ◽

Group A ◽

Group B ◽

Ankle Function

Abstract PurposeTo compare the efficacy of three different fixation methods of fibula combined with external fixation of tibia for the treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula.MethodsFrom January 2017 to July 2019, 91 cases of open fractures of distal tibia and fibula were treated with external fixator, and the fibula was fixed with non-fixation (group A, n = 35), plate-screw (group B, n = 30) and kirschner wire(group C, n = 26).The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, surgical and implants costs, fracture healing time, postoperative complications, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle surgery (AOFAS) scores were compared among the groups.ResultsFour patients were lost to follow-up, and 87 patients were followed up for 5–35 months (average, 14.2 months). The operation time of group C(114.92 ± 36.09 min) was shorter than that of group A (142.27 ± 47.05 min) and group B(184.00 ± 48.56 min) (P < 0.05). There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss among the three groups (P > 0.05). The surgical and implants costs in group C (5.24 ± 1.21, thousand dollars) is lower than that in group A (6.48 ± 1.11, thousand dollars) and group B (9.37 ± 2.16, thousand dollars) (P < 0.05).The fracture healing time of group C(5.67 ± 1.42months) was significantly less than that of group A (6.90 ± 1.33months) and group B(6.70 ± 1.12months) (P < 0.05). The postoperative complications such as fractures delayed union and nonunion in group C (2 cases, 8.00%) is less than that in group A (13 cases, 39.39%) and group B (11cases, 37.93%) (P < 0.05). The wound infection and needle-tract infection did not differ among the three groups (P > 0.05). The excellent or good rate of ankle function was 69.70% in group A, 72.41% in group B and 84.00% in group C, with no statistical difference among the three groups (P > 0.05).conclusionCompared with simple external fixator fixation and external fixator combined with plate-screw osteosynthesis, external fixator combined with K-wire intramedullary fixation shorten the operative time and fracture healing time, reduced costs and complications of fracture healing, while the blood loss, infection complications and ankle function recovery showed no difference with the other two groups. External fixator combined with plate-screw osteosynthesis had no advantage in treating extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula when compared with simple external fixation.Fund program: National Natural Science Foundation of China (11572222)

Download Full-text

External fixator combined with three different fixation methods of fibula for treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula: a retrospective study

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders ◽

10.1186/s12891-020-03840-y ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 22 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Dong-Dong Sun ◽

Dan Lv ◽

Kun Zhou ◽

Jian Chen ◽

Li-Lan Gao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Fracture Healing ◽

External Fixator ◽

Distal Tibia ◽

Operation Time ◽

Healing Time ◽

Open Fractures ◽

Group A ◽

Group B ◽

Ankle Function

Abstract Background To compare the efficacy of three different fixation methods of fibula combined with external fixation of tibia for the treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula. Methods From January 2017 to July 2019, 91 cases of open fractures of distal tibia and fibula were treated with external fixator, and the fibula was fixed with non-fixation (group A, n = 35), plate-screw (group B, n = 30) and Kirschner wire (group C, n = 26). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, surgical and implants costs, fracture healing time, postoperative complications, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle surgery (AOFAS) scores were compared among the groups. Results Four patients were lost to follow-up, and 87 patients were followed up for 5–35 months (average, 14.2 months). The operation time of group C (114.92 ± 36.09 min) was shorter than that of group A (142.27 ± 47.05 min) and group B (184.00 ± 48.56 min) (P < 0.05). There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss among the three groups (P > 0.05). The surgical and implants costs in group C (5.24 ± 1.21, thousand dollars) is lower than that in group A (6.48 ± 1.11, thousand dollars) and group B (9.37 ± 2.16, thousand dollars) (P < 0.05). The fracture healing time of group C (5.67 ± 1.42 months) was significantly less than that of group A (6.90 ± 1.33 months) and group B (6.70 ± 1.12 months) (P < 0.05). The postoperative complications such as fractures delayed union and nonunion in group C (2 cases, 8.00%) is less than that in group A (13 cases, 39.39%) and group B (11cases, 37.93%) (P < 0.05). The wound infection and needle-tract infection did not differ among the three groups (P > 0.05). The excellent or good rate of ankle function was 69.70% in group A, 72.41% in group B and 84.00% in group C, with no statistical difference among the three groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion Compared with simple external fixator fixation and external fixator combined with plate-screw osteosynthesis, external fixator combined with K-wire intramedullary fixation shortens the operative time and fracture healing time, reduced costs and complications of fracture healing, while the blood loss, infection complications and ankle function recovery showed no difference with the other two groups. External fixator combined with plate-screw osteosynthesis had no advantage in treating extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula when compared with simple external fixation.

Download Full-text

A Comparison Of The Bridge-Type Roi-c Interbody Fusion Cage System And Titanium Mesh Graft With Titanium Plate Fixation In 2-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy And Fusion With Plating And Cage System: A Retrospective Study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-41918/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Shuangjun He ◽

Zhangzhe Zhou ◽

Xiaofeng Shao ◽

Changhao Zhang ◽

Xinfeng Zhou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Interbody Fusion ◽

Operation Time ◽

Fusion Rate ◽

Cage System ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Group A ◽

Bridge Type ◽

Group B ◽

Fusion Cage

Abstract Objective: To explore the clinical efficacy and radioactive results of the bridge-type ROI-C interbody fusion cage (ROI-C) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with plating and cage system (ACDF) for cervical spondylopathy.Methods: From January 2014 to January 2018, 45 patients undergoing ACDF were retrospectively analyzed, including 24 cases of ROI-C (group A) and 21 cases of ACDF (group B). The operation time, blood loss, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (JOA), postoperative complications, imaging results including cervical Cobb angle and fusion were compared between groups.Results: All patients were successfully treated with surgery, and no cerebrospinal fluid leakage, esophageal fistula, or hoarseness occurred after surgery. The operation time and blood loss in group A were lower than those in group B (P<0.05). During the follow-up period, JOA score increased and NDI score decreased after operation (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the groups (P>0.05). The incidence of dysphagia in group A was lower than that in group B at 1 month and 3 months after operation (P<0.05), but the final follow-up results showed that there was no significant difference in the incidence of dysphagia between the two groups (P>0.05). In group A, the fusion rate was 83.3% 3 months after surgery and 100% at the last follow-up. The rate of adjacent level ossification development was 12.5%. In group B, the fusion rate was 85.7% 3 months after surgery and 100% at the last follow-up. The rate of adjacent level ossification development was 23.8%.Conclusion: Both ROI-C and ACDF can achieve satisfactory results, but ROI-C has shorter operation time, less bleeding and lower incidence of dysphagia in the short term.

Download Full-text

Peri-anchor cyst formation after arthroscopic bankart repair: comparison between biocomposite suture anchor and all-suture anchor

Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow ◽

10.5397/cise.2020.00290 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 23 (4) ◽

pp. 178-182

Author(s):

Seokhwan Jin ◽

Yong-Min Chun

Keyword(s):

Suture Anchor ◽

Cyst Formation ◽

Bankart Repair ◽

Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽

Suture Anchors ◽

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Group A ◽

Group B

Background: The purpose of this study is to investigate clinical outcomes and radiological findings of cyst formation in the glenoid around suture anchors after arthroscopic Bankart repair with either biocomposite suture anchor or all-suture anchor in traumatic anterior shoulder instability. We hypothesized that there would be no significant difference in clinical and radiological outcomes between the two suture materials.Methods: This retrospective study reviewed 162 patients (69 in group A, biocomposite anchor; 93 in group B, all-suture anchor) who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair of traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability with less than 20% glenoid defect on preoperative en-face view three-dimensional computed tomography. Patient assignment was not randomized. Results: At final follow-up, the mean subjective shoulder value, Rowe score, and University of California, Los Angeles shoulder score improved significantly in both groups. However, there were no significant differences in functional shoulder scores and recurrence rate (6%, 4/69 in group A; 5%, 5/93 in group B) between the two groups. On follow-up magnetic resonance arthrography/computed tomography arthrography, the incidence of peri-anchor cyst formation was 5.7% (4/69) in group A and 3.2% (3/93) in group B, which was not a significant difference. Conclusions: Considering the low incidence of peri-anchor cyst formation in the glenoid after Bankart repair with one of two anchor systems and the lack of association with recurrence instability, biocomposite and all-suture anchors in Bankart repair yield satisfactory outcomes with no significant difference.

Download Full-text