A Meta-Analysis of Biomechanical Studies for Suture Button Pullout Versus Suture Anchor Repair of Flexor Digitorum Profundus Avulsions.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is no current consensus on which of the two most common flexor digitorum profundus (FDP) avulsion repair constructs, via suture button pullout (SBP) or suture anchor (SA), is biomechanically superior. Our purpose was to compare these repair methods via systematic review and meta-analysis of available literature. METHODS: We performed a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-guided systematic review of PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Embase. We only included studies with direct comparison data for both techniques. We performed a meta-analysis comparing the reported biomechanical results using pooled data for initial repair stiffness (N/mm), gap formation (mm), and ultimate load to failure (N). RESULTS: Seven studies met inclusion criteria, including a total of 201 cadaveric specimens. Four studies reported initial construct stiffness, with pooled analysis showing superiority for SA repairs (P < .05). Four studies evaluated gap formation, with pooled analysis demonstrating less gapping with SA repair (P < .05). Mean gap formation was 2.4 (±1.4) mm and 3.9 (±2.0) mm for the SA and SBP groups, respectively. All 7 studies assessed load to failure, with pooled analysis revealing no significant difference between groups (P > .05). We lacked statistical power to determine equivalence between techniques for load to failure. Both groups had failure values significantly lower than the native FDP. CONCLUSIONS: Via meta-analysis, there was increased initial construct stiffness and less gap formation for SA compared to SBP for FDP reinsertion, with no significant differences for ultimate failure load.