Novel biologic scaffold-anchor may not improve rotator cuff healing vs. standard anchor
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
Key takeaways:
- A novel bioresorbable scaffold-anchor did not yield superior outcomes for rotator cuff repair vs. a standard anchor.
- Both anchors yielded similar retear rates and outcome scores at 6 months.
Published results showed the use of a novel bioresorbable scaffold-anchor to augment healing after rotator cuff repair may not yield clinically superior outcomes compared with a standard anchor.
Nathan Angerett, DO, from the department of orthopedic surgery at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, and colleagues randomly assigned 99 patients with full- or high-grade partial-thickness rotator cuff tears to receive either a standard anchor (n = 49) or the BioWick anchor (Zimmer Biomet; n = 50), an interpositional, bioresorbable scaffold-anchor, to augment healing between June 2018 and July 2019.
According to the study, the primary outcome measure was repair integrity assessed on ultrasound at 6 months postoperatively. Other outcomes included VAS pain scores, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, simple shoulder test (SST), muscle strength and range of motion (ROM), which were assessed postoperatively at 3-month intervals.
Angerett and colleagues found retear rates were 22% (n=9) in the bioresorbable scaffold-anchor group and 23% (n=10) in the standard anchor group at 6 months. They also found no significant differences in VAS scores, ASES scores, SST scores, muscle strength or ROM between the groups at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Angerett and colleagues noted no complications for any patient.
“Scaffolds and grafts are being added to rotator cuff repairs more frequently to improve biomechanical strength and promote tendon healing,” Angerett and colleagues wrote in the study. “However, in our study, we found that the novel anchor (BioWick) did not demonstrate any superior clinical improvements or a lower retear rate when compared with the standard anchor.”