ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2024
Biomechanical Comparison of Coracoclavicular Fixation Using Metallic Versus All-Suture Anchors.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transosseous all-suture anchor fixation for bony Bankart lesions: a biomechanical study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Short Expandable-Wing Suture Anchor for Osteoporotic and Small Bone Fixation: Validation in a 3D-Printed Coracoclavicular Reconstruction Model.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A coracoclavicular (CC) fixation technique using an all-suture anchor with the assistance of fluoroscopy can prevent iatrogenic anterior deltoid detachment from the clavicle; however, soft anchor pullout has been reported as a complication. Purpose: To compare the biomechanical properties of conventional metallic and all-suture anchors for CC suture fixation. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 24 fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were divided into 2 groups: metal anchor group (group M) and all-suture anchor group (group A). In group M, 5.0-mm metallic suture anchors were used for CC fixation, whereas 2.8-mm all-suture anchors were used in group A. The prepared specimens were mounted on a materials testing machine. After preconditioning at 0 to 20 N for 10 cycles, the specimens were subjected to cyclic loading from 20 to 70 N for 1000 cycles. Finally, all the specimens were loaded to failure. Cyclic elongation, linear stiffness, ultimate load, and failure modes were recorded, and the Mann-Whitney Results: All of the specimens completed the cyclic loading test. The elongation after cyclic loading in group M (1.6 ± 0.6 mm) was significantly smaller compared with that in group A (2.5 ± 1.2 mm) ( Conclusion: The use of all-suture anchors in CC fixation resulted in significantly greater cyclic displacement and smaller ultimate failure load than that of metallic anchors. Clinical Relevance: Understanding the most biomechanically sound suture anchor may assist in lowering the risk of clinical failure in CC fixation and repair.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.