Primary Stability and Bone Contact Loading Evaluation of Suture and Screw based Coracoid Graft Fixation for Anterior Glenoid Bone Loss.

BACKGROUND

Reconstruction techniques for anterior glenoid bone loss have seen a trend from screws to suture-based fixations. However, comparative biomechanical data, including primary fixation and glenoid-graft contact pressure mapping, are limited.

HYPOTHESIS: Suture-based bone block cerclage (BBC) and suspensory suture button (SB) techniques provide similar primary fixation and cyclic stability to double-screw fixation but with higher contact loading at the bony interface.

STUDY

DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

In total, 60 cadaveric scapulae were prepared to simulate anterior glenoid bone loss with coracoid autograft reconstruction. Graft fixation was performed with 3 different techniques: (1) an interconnected all-suture BBC, (2) 2 SB suspensions, and (3) 2 screws. Initial compression was analyzed during primary fixation. Cyclic peak loading with 50 N and 100 N over 250 cycles at 1 Hz was performed with a constant valley load of 25 N. Optical recording and pressure foils allowed for spatial bone block tracking and contact pressure mapping at the glenoid-graft interface. Load-to-failure testing was performed at a rate of 1.5 mm/s with ultimate load and stiffness measured.

RESULTS

Initial graft compression was higher with screw fixation (141 ± 5 N) compared with suture-based fixations (P < .001), with BBC fixation providing significantly higher compression than SB fixation (116 ± 7 N vs. 91 ± 5 N; P < .001). Spatial bone block migration and ultimate failure load were similar between the BBC and screw groups. The SB group showed significantly increased bone block translation (3.1 ± 1.0 mm; P≤ .014) and rotation (2.5°± 1.4°; P≤ .025) and significantly lower ultimate failure load (180 ± 53 N) compared with the BBC (P = .046) and screw (P = .002) groups. Both suture-based fixations provided significantly increased graft-glenoid contact loading with higher pressure amplitudes (P≤ .032) and contact pressure after cyclic loading (+13%; SB: P = .007; BBC: P = .004) compared with screw fixation.

CONCLUSION

Both SB and interconnected cerclage fixation improved dynamic contact loading compared with screw fixation in a biomechanical glenoid bone loss model. Cerclage fixation was biomechanically comparable with screw fixation but with a greater variability. SB fixation showed significantly lower primary fixation strength and greater bone block rotation and migration.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Suture-based bone block fixations improved graft-glenoid contact loading, but the overall clinical consequence on healing remains unclear.