To assess the current literature on suture anchor placement for the purpose of identifying factors that lead to suture anchor perforation and techniques that reduce the likelihood of complications. Three databases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE) were searched, and two reviewers independently screened the resulting literature. Methodological quality of all included papers was assessed using Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment tool. Results are presented in a narrative summary fashion using descriptive statistics. Fourteen studies were included in this review. Four case series (491 patients, 56.6% female, mean age 33.9 years), nine controlled cadaveric/laboratory studies (111 cadaveric hips and 12 sawbones, 42.2% female, mean age 60.0 years), and one randomized controlled trial (37 hips, 55.6% female, mean age 34.2 years) were included. Anterior cortical perforation by suture anchors led to pain and impingement of pelvic neurovascular structures. The anterior acetabular positions (three to four o'clock) had the thinnest bone, smallest rim angles, and highest incidence of articular perforation. Drilling angles from 10° to 20° measured off the coronal plane were acceptable. The mid-anterior (MA) and distal anterolateral (DALA) portals were used successfully, with some studies reporting difficulty placing anchors at anterior locations via the DALA portal. Small-diameter (< 1 .8-mm) suture anchors had a lower in vivo incidence of articular perforation with similar stability and pull-out strength in biomechanical studies. Suture anchors at anterior acetabular rim positions (3–4 o'clock) should be inserted with caution. Large-diameter (>2.3-mm) suture anchors increase the likelihood of articular perforation without increasing labral stability. Inserting small-diameter (< 1 .8-mm) all-suture suture anchors (ASAs) from 10° to 20° using curved suture anchor drill guides, may increase safe insertion angles from all cutaneous portals. Direct arthroscopic visualization, use of fluoroscopy, distal-proximal insertion, and the use of nitinol wire can help prevent articular violation.
To determine the differences of biomechanical properties in three conditions including 1) native cam deformity 2) cam deformity with incomplete resection and 3) cam deformity with complete resection. A cadaveric study was performed using 8 frozen, hemi-pelvises with cam-type deformity (alpha angle >55°) measured on CT scan and an intact labrum. Intraarticular pressure maps were produced for each specimen under the following conditions: 1) native cam deformity, 2) cam deformity with incomplete resection and 3) cam deformity with complete resection. A 5.5-mm burr was used to resect the lateral portion of the cam deformity to a depth of 3–4 mm. The specimen was placed in a custom designed jig in the MTS electromechanical test system to create pressure and area map measurements. In each condition, three biomechanical parameters were obtained including contact pressure, contact area and peak force within a region-of-interest (ROI). Repeated measurements were performed for three times in each condition and the average value of each parameter was used for statistical analysis. ANOVA was used to compare biomechanical parameters between three conditions.Purpose
Methods
