Migration of “bioabsorbable” screws in ACL repair. How much do we know? A systematic review
- 867 Downloads
Although bioabsorbable screws promise to degrade within months up to several years after implantation, often this does not happen. In fact, other problems such as screw breakage, tunnel enlargement, allergic or foreign body reactions, cyst or abscess formation, and delayed migration of “biodegradable” screws have been reported. This study aims to provide relevant basic science knowledge and recent insights concerning “biomaterials” currently used in fixation devices for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair. A systematic review on the topic of screw “migration” is provided.
A PubMed search combining all the key terms was done looking for complications related to late migration of “bioabsorbable” screws used in ACL reconstruction without inferior time limitation up to January 2012. Only clinical reports were included. Reference lists of reports were checked to detect others not identified by the original search. A pre-publication search was performed to identify the most recent relevant articles.
A total of ten articles referred to migration of “bioabsorbable” interference screws. Most cases reported on poly-L-lactic acid-based screws. Migration was noticed between 3 and 22 months postoperatively. It was noticed both in the tibia and the femur and with the application of several types of graft.
Migration is a possible complication of “bioabsorbable” interference screws. The information related to all clinical implications of the so-called “biodegradable screws” remains scarce and probably suffers from the phenomenon of publication bias. The complexity of possible reactions occurring in the human body is difficult to reproduce under controlled laboratory conditions.
Level of evidence
Systematic review including case-reports, Level V.
KeywordsACL Bioabsorbable Interference screw Polylactic acid Polyglycolic acid Migration
- 17.Gunatillake PA, Adhikari R (2003) Biodegradable synthetic polymers for tissue engineering. Eur Cell Mater 20(5):1–16Google Scholar
- 18.Halewood C, Hirschmann MT, Newman S, Hleihil J, Chaimski G, Amis AA (2011) The fixation strength of a novel ACL soft-tissue graft fixation device compared with conventional interference screws: a biomechanical study in vitro. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(4):559–567PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Jarvela T, Moisala AS, Sihvonen R, Jarvela S, Kannus P, Jarvinen M (2008) Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring autografts and bioabsorbable interference screw fixation: prospective, randomized, clinical study with 2-year results. Am J Sports Med 36(2):290–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Lajtai G, Noszian I, Humer K, Unger F, Aitzetmuller G, Orthner E (1999) Serial magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of operative site after fixation of patellar tendon graft with bioabsorbable interference screws in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 15(7):709–718PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Maletis GB, Cameron SL, Tengan JJ, Burchette RJ (2007) A prospective randomized study of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of patellar tendon and quadruple-strand semitendinosus/gracilis tendons fixed with bioabsorbable interference screws. Am J Sports Med 35(3):384–394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Moisala AS, Jarvela T, Paakkala A, Paakkala T, Kannus P, Jarvinen M (2008) Comparison of the bioabsorbable and metal screw fixation after ACL reconstruction with a hamstring autograft in MRI and clinical outcome: a prospective randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(12):1080–1086PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 45.Sharma V, Curtis C, Micheli L (2008) Extra-articular extraosseous migration of a bioabsorbable femoral interference screw after ACL reconstruction. Orthopedics 31(10):1040Google Scholar
- 48.Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, Sutton AJ, Hing C, Kwok CS, Pang C, Harvey I (2010) Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health Technol Assess 14(8):iii, ix–xi 1–193Google Scholar