Effectiveness of suture anchor and transosseous suture technique in arthroscopic foveal repair of the triangular fibrocartilage complex: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Currently, there were two major surgical methods for arthroscopic triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC) foveal repair suture anchor (SA) and transosseous suture (TOS). The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the relevant outcome improvement and safety of SA and TOS technique. METHODS: Literature review of electronic databases for studies investigating the effects of SA and TOS in patients undergoing arthroscopic TFCC foveal repair was performed. We compared the pre-operative and postoperative functional outcomes, clinical outcomes [pain, range of motion (ROM) and grip strength], and complications of two methods. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was used to determine clinically meaningful improvement. RESULTS: There were 1263 distinct studies identified, with 26 (904 patients) meeting the inclusion criteria. The mean age of participants ranged from 21.4 to 41 years, and the mean follow-up time ranged from 6 to 106 months. Both SA and TOS groups reported significant improvement in the modified mayo wrist score, the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score, quick DASH score, patient-reported wrist evaluation (PRWE) score, and the visual analog scale (VAS) score. According to MCID, all the studies from both groups reporting DASH, quick DASH, PRWE and VAS score achieved clinically meaningful improvement. (MCID 10 for DASH, 14 for quick DASH, 14 for PRWE and 1.6-18 for VAS). The ROM changes in both groups varied from improvement to deterioration. Grip strength improved in both SA and TOS group. Most complications were self-limited. The reoperation rates in SA and TOS ranged from 0 to 20% and 0 to 27.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both SA and TOS technique for arthroscopic TFCC foveal repair could achieve improvement in postoperative functional outcomes, pain, and grip strength with low reoperation rate. However, the ROM improvement was still inconclusive. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV Systematic review of level III and IV studies.