[Biomechanical evaluation of biointegrable suture anchors composed of bovine compact bone in a pull-to-failure test in porcine tibial head specimens].

Aim: Suture anchors of various designs have gained wide acceptance for securing soft tissues to bone. The biointegrable Tutofix CB anchors derived from bovine compact bone are available with diameters of 3 mm (CB3 anchor), 4 mm (CB4 anchor) and 5 mm (CB5 anchor). The CB anchors are push-in anchors and, from the biomechanical standpoint, they are a combination of press-fit and angulation anchors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the CB anchors for singular pull load-to-failure strength using porcine tibial head specimens as a test model.

Methods: In all specimens, the joint surface was removed by performing a subchondral osteotomy. Axial PQ-CT scans of 12 specimens were obtained to determine the trabecular BMD. The anchors were implanted posteromedially and centrolaterally in the porcine tibial head specimens. After threading the anchors with a steel suture and predrilling of the anchor holes perpendicular to the osteotomy surface they were inserted 4 mm below the osteotomy surface. A universal testing machine applied tensile loads parallel to the axis of insertion at rates of 10 mm/min and 500 mm/min until pull-out failure or anchor breakage and mean anchor fixation strengths were calculated.

Results: The fixation strength of the CB anchors was found to be much higher at the dorsomedial implantation site than at the centrolateral implantation site. The CB4 anchors and CB5 anchors provided nearly the same fixation strength at a level much higher than that of the CB3 anchors. Bone mineral density had a strong influence on axial pull-out force of the anchors, especially the CB4 anchors and CB5 anchors. The overall correlation coefficient for bone mineral density with ultimate load-to-failure was 0.869 for the CB4 anchors and 0.716 for the CB5 anchors. Differences in failure strengths were also seen between the low and high extraction rates. With the high extraction rate much higher failure strengths were obtained than with the low extraction rate. The sudden pull eccentrically on the anchors caused a better fixation due to angulation of the anchor within the drill holes.

Conclusion: In spite of the double worst-case scenario in the testing conditions, the CB anchors provided a high fixation strength in the trabecular bone of porcine tibial head specimens with the CB4 anchors and CB5 anchors being nearly equal and both being superior to the CB3 anchors. Bone mineral density had a strong influence on the axial pull-out force. Our results show that the CB anchors seem to be a reasonable alternative to metal and bioabsorbable suture anchors.