Meta-analysis on biomechanical properties of meniscus repairs: are devices better than sutures?

Purpose Meniscal repair devices have been extensively tested during the past decades as reported in the literature. Reviewing the different meniscal repair devices and sutures with their respective biomechanical properties. Methods For this meta-analysis, we conducted a systematic online search usin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2015-01, Vol.23 (1), p.83-89
Main Authors: M. Buckland, Daniel, Sadoghi, Patrick, Wimmer, Matthias D., Vavken, Patrick, Pagenstert, Geert I., Valderrabano, Victor, Rosso, Claudio
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Absorbable Implants
Biomechanical Phenomena
Biomechanics
Bone surgery
Cartilage
Hospitals
Humans
Knee
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Menisci, Tibial - surgery
Meta-analysis
Orthopedics
Polyethylene Terephthalates
Stress, Mechanical
Surgeons
Suture Techniques - instrumentation
Sutures
Tensile Strength
Wound Healing
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose Meniscal repair devices have been extensively tested during the past decades as reported in the literature. Reviewing the different meniscal repair devices and sutures with their respective biomechanical properties. Methods For this meta-analysis, we conducted a systematic online search using PubMed, EMBASE, CCTR, and CINAHL using the search terms Meniscus OR Meniscal AND Biomechanics AND Repair) . Load-to-failure (LtF), stiffness, and cyclic outcome measures were extracted independently and in duplicate. The systematic search revealed 841 manuscripts in total. After exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant publications, 41 studies remained for final analysis. The studies were published in English and German from 1995 to 2013. Due to differing cyclic force protocols, cyclic outcomes had to be excluded. Results Overall, sutures had a higher LtF [suture: 87.7 ± 0.3 N (weighted mean ± standard error), device: 56.3 ± 0.1 N] and stiffness (suture: 8.9 ± 0.04 N/mm, device: 8.6 ± 0.04 N/mm) than devices, both p  
ISSN:0942-2056
1433-7347
DOI:10.1007/s00167-014-2966-9