Primary Fixation and Cyclic Performance of Single-Stitch All-Inside and Inside-Out Meniscal Devices for Repairing Vertical Longitudinal Meniscal Tears

Abstract

Background:

Primary device fixation and the resistance against gap formation during repetitive loading influence the quality of meniscal repair. There are limited biomechanical data comparing primary tensioning and cyclic behavior of all-inside versus inside-out repair.

Hypothesis:

All-inside devices provide higher initial load on the meniscal repair than inside-out fixation, and stiffer constructs show higher resistance against gap formation during cyclic loading.

Study Design:

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods:

In total, 60 longitudinal bucket-handle tears in human cadaveric menisci were created and repaired with a single stitch and randomly assigned to 4 all-inside groups (TrueSpan, FastFix 360, Stryker AIR, FiberStich) and 2 inside-out groups (suture repair [IO-S], suture tape [IO-ST]). Residual load after repair tensioning (50 N) and relief displacement were measured. Constructs underwent cyclic loading between 2 and 20 N over 500 cycles (0.75 Hz) with cyclic stiffness, gap formation, and final peak elongation measured. Ultimate load and stiffness were analyzed during pull to failure (3.15 mm/s).

Results:

All-inside repair demonstrated significantly higher primary fixation strength than inside-out repair. The significantly highest load (mean ± SD; 20.1 ± 0.9 N; P < .037) and relief displacement (–2.40 ± 0.32 mm; P < .03) were for the knotless soft anchoring FiberStich group. The lowest initial load (9.0 ± 1.5 N; P < .001) and relief displacement (–1.39 ± 0.26 mm; P < .045) were for the IO-S repair group. The final gap formation (500th cycle) of FiberStich (0.75 ± 0.37 mm; P < .02) was significantly smaller than others and that of the IO-S (1.47 ± 0.33 mm; P < .045) significantly larger. The construct stiffness of the FiberStich and IO-ST groups was significantly greater at the end of cyclic testing (16.7 ± 0.80 and 15.5 ± 1.42 N/mm; P < .042, respectively) and ultimate failure testing (23.4 ± 3.6 and 20.6 ± 2.3 N/mm; P < .005). The FastFix 360 (86.4 ± 4.8 N) and Stryker AIR (84.4 ± 4.6 N) groups failed at a significantly lower load than the IO-S group (P < .02) with loss of anchor support. The FiberStich (146.8 ± 23.4 N), TrueSpan (142.0 ± 17.8 N), and IO-ST (139.4 ± 7.3 N) groups failed at significantly higher loads (P < .02) due to suture tearing.

Conclusion:

Overall, primary fixation strength of inside-out meniscal repair was significantly lower than all-inside repair in this cadaveric tissue model. Although absolute differences among groups were small, meniscal repairs with higher construct stiffness (IO-ST, FiberStich) demonstrated increased resistance against gap formation and failure load.

Clinical Relevance:

Knotless single-stitch all-inside meniscal repair with a soft anchor resulted in less gapping, but the overall clinical significance on healing rates remains unclear.

Keywords

meniscal repair all-inside inside-out primary fixation biomechanics

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bachmaier

DiFelice

Sonnery-Cottet

, et al. Treatment of acute proximal anterior cruciate ligament tears—part 1: gap formation and stabilization potential of repair techniques. Orthop J Sports Med. 2020;8(1):2325967119897421. doi:10.1177/2325967119897421

Barber

Coons

Ruiz-Suarez

. Meniscal repair with the RapidLoc meniscal repair device. Arthroscopy. 2006;22(9):962-966. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2006.04.109

Barber

Herbert

Bava

Drew

. Biomechanical testing of suture-based meniscal repair devices containing ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene suture: update 2011. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(6):827-834. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.020

Barber

Herbert

Richards

. Load to failure testing of new meniscal repair devices. Arthroscopy. 2004;20:45-50. doi:10.1016/S0749-8063(03)01109-5

Barber

Howard

Ashraf

Spenciner

. The biomechanical performance of the latest all-inside meniscal repair devices. Arthroscopy. 2020;36(12):3001-3007. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2020.03.036

Beamer

Masoudi

Walley

, et al. Analysis of a new all-inside versus inside-out technique for repairing radial meniscal tears. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(2):293-298. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2014.08.011

Chang

Nyland

Caborn

Burden

. Biomechanical evaluation of meniscal repair systems: a comparison of the Meniscal Viper Repair System, the vertical mattress FasT-Fix Device, and vertical mattress Ethibond sutures. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33(12):1846-1852. doi:10.1177/0363546505278254

Cinque

DePhillipo

Moatshe

, et al. Clinical outcomes of inside-out meniscal repair according to anatomic zone of the meniscal tear. Orthop J Sports Med. 2019;7(7):2325967119860806. doi:10.1177/2325967119860806

Cohen

Anderson

Miller

. Chondral injury after arthroscopic meniscal repair using bioabsorbable Mitek Rapidloc meniscal fixation. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(7):e73-e75. doi:10.1016/s0749-8063(03)00690-x

10.

Danso

Julkunen

Korhonen

. Poisson’s ratio of bovine meniscus determined combining unconfined and confined compression. J Biomech. 2018;77:233-237. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.07.001

11.

Erduran

Hapa

Sen

, et al. The effect of inclination angle on the strength of vertical mattress configuration for meniscus repair. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(1):41-44. doi:10.1007/s00167-013-2496-x

12.

Espejo-Baena

Martín-Castilla

Serrano-Fernandez

, et al. Inside-out medial meniscus suture: an analysis of the risk of injury to the popliteal neurovascular bundle. Arthroscopy. 2011;27:516-521. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2010.09.010

13.

Fillingham

Riboh

Erickson

Bach

Jr Yanke

. Inside-out versus all-inside repair of isolated meniscal tears: an updated systematic review. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(1):234-242. doi:10.1177/0363546516632504

14.

Greis

Bardana

Holmstrom

Burks

. Meniscal injury: I. Basic science and evaluation. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2002;10(3):168-176. doi:10.5435/00124635-200205000-00003

15.

Gwathmey

Jr Golish

Diduch

. Complications in brief: meniscus repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(7):2059-2066. doi:10.1007/s11999-012-2303-x

16.

Kelly

JDT

Ebrahimpour

. Chondral injury and synovitis after arthroscopic meniscal repair using an outside-in mulberry knot suture technique. Arthroscopy. 2004;20(5):e49-e52. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2004.03.022

17.

Leishman

Chudik

. Suture tape with broad full-width core versus traditional round suture with round core: a mechanical comparison. Arthroscopy. 2019;35(8):2461-2466. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2019.03.053

18.

Logerstedt

Scalzitti

Bennell

, et al. Knee pain and mobility impairments: meniscal and articular cartilage lesions revision. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2018;48(2):A1-A50. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.0301

19.

Logerstedt

Snyder-Mackler

Ritter

Axe

; Orthopedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association. Knee pain and mobility impairments: meniscal and articular cartilage lesions. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010;40(6):A1-A35. doi:10.2519/jospt.2010.0304

20.

Lutz

Dalmay

Ehkirch

, et al. Meniscectomy versus meniscal repair: 10 years radiological and clinical results in vertical lesions in stable knee. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2015;101(8):S327-S331. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2015.09.008

21.

Majeed

Karuppiah

Sigamoney

Geutjens

Straw

. All-inside meniscal repair surgery: factors affecting the outcome. J Orthop Traumatol. 2015;16(3):245-249. doi:10.1007/s10195-015-0342-2

22.

Marchetti

Phelps

Dahl

, et al. A contact pressure analysis comparing an all-inside and inside-out surgical repair technique for bucket-handle medial meniscus tears. Arthroscopy. 2017;33(10): 1840-1848. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2017.04.013

23.

Masoudi

Beamer

Harlow

, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of an all-inside suture-based device for repairing longitudinal meniscal tears. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(3):428-434. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2014.08.027

24.

Mehta

Terry

. Cyclic testing of 3 all-inside meniscal repair devices: a biomechanical analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37(12): 2435-2439. doi:10.1177/0363546509346051

25.

Müller

Schwenk

de Wild

Dimitriou

Rosso

. Increased construct stiffness with meniscal repair sutures and devices increases the risk of cheese-wiring during biomechanical load-to-failure testing. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021;9(6):23259671211015674. doi:10.1177/23259671211015674

26.

Noyes

Barber-Westin

. Management of meniscus tears that extend into the avascular region. Clin Sports Med. 2012;31(1):65-90. doi:10.1016/j.csm.2011.08.009

27.

Noyes

Barber-Westin

Chen

. Repair of complex and avascular meniscal tears and meniscal transplantation. Instr Course Lect. 2011;60:415-437.

28.

Post

Akers

Kish

. Load to failure of common meniscal repair techniques: effects of suture technique and suture material. Arthroscopy. 1997;13(6):731-736. doi:10.1016/S0749-8063(97)90008-6

29.

Pujol

Tardy

Boisrenoult

Beaufils

. Long-term outcomes of all-inside meniscal repair. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(1):219-224. doi:10.1007/s00167-013-2553-5

30.

Ramappa

Chen

Hertz

, et al. A biomechanical evaluation of all-inside 2-stitch meniscal repair devices with matched inside-out suture repair. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(1):194-199. doi:10.1177/0363546513505190

31.

Rimmer

Nawana

Keene

GCR

Pearcy

. Failure strengths of different meniscal suturing techniques. Arthroscopy. 1995;11(2): 146-150. doi:10.1016/0749-8063(95)90059-4

32.

Roos

Ostenberg

Roos

Ekdahl

Lohmander

. Long-term outcome of meniscectomy: symptoms, function, and performance tests in patients with or without radiographic osteoarthritis compared to matched controls. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2001;9(4): 316-324. doi:10.1053/joca.2000.0391

33.

Rosso

Kovtun

Dow

, et al. Comparison of all-inside meniscal repair devices with matched inside-out suture repair. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39(12):2634-2639. doi:10.1177/0363546511424723

34.

Saliman

. The circumferential compression stitch for meniscus repair. Arthrosc Tech. 2013;2(3):e257-e264. doi:10.1016/j.eats.2013.02.016

35.

Samuelsen

Johnson

Hevesi

, et al. Comparative outcomes of all-inside versus inside-out repair of bucket-handle meniscal tears: a propensity-matched analysis. Orthop J Sports Med. 2018;6(6):2325967118779045. doi:10.1177/2325967118779045

36.

Vint

Quartley

Robinson

. All-inside versus inside-out meniscal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee. 2021;28:326-337. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2020.12.005

37.

Walgrave

Claes

Bellemans

. High incidence of intraoperative anchorage failure in FasT-fix all inside meniscal suturing device. Acta Orthop Belg. 2013;79(6):689-693.

38.

Zantop

Eggers

Musahl

Weimann

Petersen

. Cyclic testing of flexible all-inside meniscus suture anchors: biomechanical analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33(3):388-394. doi:10.1177/0363546504271204

39.

Zantop

Eggers

Weimann

Hassenpflug

Petersen

. Initial fixation strength of flexible all-inside meniscus suture anchors in comparison to conventional suture technique and rigid anchors: biomechanical evaluation of new meniscus refixation systems. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(4):863-869. doi:10.1177/0363546503260749

40.

Zantop

Temmig

Weimann

, et al. Elongation and structural properties of meniscal repair using suture techniques in distraction and shear force scenarios: biomechanical evaluation using a cyclic loading protocol. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34(5):799-805. doi:10.1177/0363546505285583

41.

Zimmerer

Sobau

Nietschke

Schneider

Ellermann

. Long-term outcome after all inside meniscal repair using the FasT-Fix system. J Orthop. 2018;15(2):602-605. doi:10.1016/j.jor.2018.05.042