Abstract
PURPOSE: This study examined and compared all-suture anchors with metallic anchors in the arthroscopic repair of small to medium supraspinatus tears; a multi-dimensional evaluation protocol assessed (i) clinical, (ii) ultrasonographical, and (iii) functional criteria at mid-term. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 40 patients, prescreened from a larger group who had undergone arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, were resolved into two groups of 20, based on the type of anchor used in their surgery (all-suture or metallic) and were evaluated postoperatively (mean = 44.3 months, SEM = 22.4 months, minimum period = 10.3 months). Clinical assessments included (i) objective and subjective scores (Constant, DASH, SPADI, SST), (ii) ultrasonographical examination, as well as (iii) isometric and isokinetic strength testing. Raw data from the operated side was compared with those from the contralateral side within each group. Raw data for the PROMs and for the US evaluation were compared between groups. Strength data, as well as the Constant score values, were further analyzed based on (i) the difference between operated and intact sides, as well as (ii) the strength ratio between operated and intact sides; the transformed data were then compared between the two groups. RESULTS: We found no statistically significant differences in any of the parameters considered between shoulders operated using ASAs or MAs, nor between operated and non-operated sides in each group. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that the reliability and performance characteristics of all-suture anchors and metallic anchors are practically indistinguishable for arthroscopic treatment of small to medium lesions of the supraspinatus tendon.