Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery
Systematic ReviewBioabsorbable Versus Metallic Interference Screws in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-analyses
Section snippets
Methods
The English-language literature was searched on March 12, 2014, using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The following key words were used: “bioabsorbable,” “metallic OR metal,” and “anterior cruciate ligament.” General search terms were used to ensure thorough study inclusion. The resultant study titles and abstracts were reviewed and manually cross-referenced to identify all potentially eligible studies. The inclusion criteria were (1)
Results
The initial search of terms resulted in 52 total articles (Fig 1), of which 3 studies published between 2010 and 2014 met the eligibility criteria.24, 25, 26 They consisted of 1 Level I study25 and 2 Level II studies.24, 26 No conflict of interest was present in any study. All studies performed heterogeneity analytics. The total sample size ranged from 711 patients24 to 790 patients.26 The follow-up periods included in these studies ranged from 12 months25, 26 to 96 months.24 The follow-up rate
Discussion
The major findings of this study were prolonged knee effusion, increased femoral tunnel widening, and increased screw breakage associated with BIS use. This study did not assess cost aspects associated with BIS use versus MIS use.
With an increasing number of ACL reconstructions performed annually, it is critical that the procedure be performed in a manner that provides the patient with the best chance for successful clinical and functional outcomes with the lowest rate of adverse events. Many
Conclusions
Ultimately, the meta-analyses with the best available evidence showed prolonged knee effusion, increased femoral tunnel widening, and increased screw breakage with BIS use. In a health care generation particularly conscious of cost-effectiveness, further detailed analyses of the cost-benefit ratio of BISs compared with MISs would be valuable in making further definitive recommendations for or against the continued use of BISs in specific situations or in particular patient populations in which
References (45)
- et al.
Comparisons of femoral tunnel position and length in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Modified transtibial versus anteromedial portal techniques
Arthroscopy
(2011) - et al.
Pitfalls in the use of interference screws for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Brief report
Arthroscopy
(1989) - et al.
Comparison of in vitro and in vivo complement activation by metal and bioabsorbable screws used in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
Arthroscopy
(2006) - et al.
Pre-tibial reaction to biointerference screw in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
Knee
(2014) - et al.
Tibial cyst formation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a new bioabsorbable screw
Knee
(2002) - et al.
Insertion torque pullout strength relationship of soft tissue tendon graft tibia tunnel fixation with a bioabsorbable interference screw
Arthroscopy
(2004) - et al.
A prospective randomized comparison of bioabsorbable and titanium anterior cruciate ligament interference screws
Arthroscopy
(2005) - et al.
Bioabsorbable versus titanium interference screws with hamstring autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A prospective randomized trial with 2-year follow-up
Arthroscopy
(2008) - et al.
Bioabsorbable versus metallic interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Arthroscopy
(2010) - et al.
Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses
Lancet
(1999)
Validation of an index of the quality of review articles
J Clin Epidemiol
Bioabsorbable versus titanium interference screws with hamstring autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A prospective randomized trial with 2-year follow-up
Arthroscopy
A prospective randomized comparison of bioabsorbable and titanium anterior cruciate ligament interference screws
Arthroscopy
A new bioabsorbable interference screw: Preliminary results of a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial
Arthroscopy
Bioabsorbable polyglyconate interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A prospective computed tomography-controlled study
Arthroscopy
Bioabsorbable interference screws for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
Arthroscopy
Preliminary results of an absorbable interference screw
Arthroscopy
An international survey on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction practices
Int Orthop
Vascularized patellar tendon graft with rigid internal fixation for anterior cruciate ligament insufficiency
Clin Orthop Relat Res
Comparison of failure strength between metallic and absorbable interference screws. Influence of insertion torque, tunnel-bone block gap, bone mineral density, and interference
Am J Sports Med
Transplant fixation by anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Metal vs. bioabsorbable polyglyconate interference screw. A prospective randomized study of 40 patients
Unfallchirurg
Fixation of patellar tendon bone graft in reconstruction of patellar ligaments. Comparison of bioabsorbable and metal interference screws—Results of treatment
Ortop Traumatol Rehabil
Cited by (50)
Metal vs non-metal fixation methods for patellar fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes
2023, Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and TraumaEarly cost estimating model for new bioabsorbable orthopedic implant candidates: A theoretical study
2021, Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical MaterialsCitation Excerpt :Several HTA studies were performed to evaluate currently available bioabsorbable orthopedic implants, aiming to recommend their adoption in the clinical practice. These are economic studies (e.g. cost-effective analysis and cost-benefit analysis) or meta-analysis studies that compare, for each orthopedic application, the outcomes of using bioabsorbable implants in treatment strategies, usually against the use of metallic implants (Bakelen et al., 2015; Eng et al., 2015; Mascarenhas et al., 2015; Shen et al., 2010). Regarding the early HTA, scant literature is available for the development of new bioabsorbable implants.
Comparative Risk-Benefit Profiles of Individual Devices for Graft Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis
2020, Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgeryCitation Excerpt :To date, several conventional meta-analyses have assessed the efficacy and safety of different devices for graft fixation.16,23-26,50-52 Of these, 3 showed similar efficacy between bio-screws and metal screws,23,26,52 but bio-screws may be associated with more treatment failures.23 Two showed no significant difference in terms of clinical outcomes between a cross pin and an interference screw24 or between a cross pin and a cortical button.25
Complications With Fixation Devices in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Surgery
2020, Complications in Orthopaedics: Sports Medicine
The authors report the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: N.N.V. receives support from Smith & Nephew, Vindico Medical, Major League Baseball, and Omeros and is part of a sports fellowship that receives support from Arthrex, Smith & Nephew, Össur, and Linvatec. B.J.C. receives support from Arthrex, DJ Orthopaedics, Johnson & Johnson, Regentis, Zimmer, Medipost, Smith & Nephew, Carticept, and Regentis. C.B-J. receives support from The Foundry as an unpaid consultant. B.R.B. receives support from Arthrex, ConMed Linvatec, DJ Orthopaedics, Össur, Smith & Nephew, and Tornier.