Advertisement

Biomechanical Performance of Traditional Arthroscopic Knots Versus Slippage-Proof Knots

      Purpose

      To compare the biomechanical, time, and profile characteristics of a new sliding locking knot termed the slippage-proof knot (SPK) and a modified slippage-proof knot (MSPK) with those of traditional arthroscopic knots.

      Methods

      We evaluated the Samsung Medical Center (SMC) knot, Revo knot, SPK, and MSPK (an SPK with a single added half-hitch) tied with high-strength suture, with 11 trials of each cycled 1,000 times between 10 and 45 N and then loaded to failure. Total displacement during cyclical testing, maximal load to failure, and mode of failure were recorded for each knot. We also measured the dimensions of the knots and the time required to tie each knot.

      Results

      On load-to-failure testing, no difference in strength was found between the SMC and Revo knots (P = .082). The Revo knot and MSPK were also of equivalent strength (P = .183), and the SMC knot was 11% stronger than the MSPK (P = .017). All 3 of these knots were stronger than the SPK. On cyclical testing, the SMC knot, Revo knot, and MSPK allowed equivalent total displacement and allowed statistically less total displacement than the SPK. All SMC knots, Revo knots, and MSPKs failed by suture breakage, whereas the SPKs all slipped at failure. We found that the SPKs and MSPKs are tied more quickly than traditional knots. The SPK and MSPK dimensions are wider yet shorter than those of the other knots in the study.

      Conclusions

      Our results indicate that the MSPK has biomechanical properties comparable to the SMC and Revo knots despite only requiring 1 added half-hitch, whereas the SPK was found to be significantly inferior to the other knots tested. We found that the slippage-proof knots (SPK and MSPK) were tied more quickly and have shorter, wider profiles than traditional knots.

      Clinical Relevance

      The MSPK has knot security comparable to the SMC and Revo knots while requiring only 1 added half-hitch, and it may be most beneficial in cases in which a large number of knots will be tied because the fewer required half-hitches reduces the surgical time without reducing its biomechanical properties.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Arthroscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Barber F.A.
        • Herbert M.A.
        • Beavis R.C.
        Cyclic load and failure of arthroscopic knots and high strength sutures.
        Arthroscopy. 2009; 25: 192-199
        • Mahar A.T.
        • Serra-Hsu F.
        • Pedowitz R.A.
        Comparison and performance characteristics of 3 different knots when tied with 2 suture materials used for shoulder arthroscopy.
        Arthroscopy. 2006; 22: 614.e1-614.e2
        • Abbi G.
        • Espinoza L.
        • Odell T.
        • Mahar A.
        • Pedowitz R.
        Evaluation of 5 knots and 2 suture materials for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: Very strong sutures can still slip.
        Arthroscopy. 2006; 22: 38-43
        • Baumgarten K.M.
        • Wright R.W.
        Incorporating evidence-based medicine in arthroscopic knot preferences: A survey of American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine members.
        Am J Orthop. 2010; 39: 577-581
        • Lo I.K.
        • Burkhart S.S.
        • Chan K.C.
        • Athanasiou K.
        Arthroscopic knots: Determining the optimal balance of loop security and knot security.
        Arthroscopy. 2004; 20: 489-502
        • Kim S.H.
        • Yoo J.C.
        • Wang J.H.
        • Choi K.W.
        • Bae T.S.
        • Lee C.Y.
        Arthroscopic sliding knot: How many additional half-hitches are really needed?.
        Arthroscopy. 2005; 21: 405-411
        • Jo C.H.
        • Yoon K.S.
        • Lee J.H.
        • Kang S.B.
        • Lee M.C.
        The slippage-proof knot: A new, nonstacking, arthroscopic, sliding, locking knot with a lag bight.
        Orthopedics. 2007; 30: 349-350
        • Hassinger S.M.
        • Wongworawat M.D.
        • Hechanova J.W.
        Biomechanical characteristics of 10 arthroscopic knots.
        Arthroscopy. 2006; 22: 827-832
        • Burkhart S.S.
        • Diaz Pagan J.L.
        • Wirth M.A.
        • Athanasiou K.A.
        Cyclic loading of anchor-based rotator cuff repairs: Confirmation of the tension overload phenomenon and comparison of suture anchor fixation with transosseous fixation.
        Arthroscopy. 1997; 13: 720-724
        • Burkhart S.S.
        • Johnson T.C.
        • Wirth M.A.
        • Athanasiou K.A.
        Cyclic loading of transosseous rotator cuff repairs: Tension overload as a possible cause of failure.
        Arthroscopy. 1997; 13: 172-176
        • Barber F.A.
        • Hapa O.
        • Bynum J.A.
        Comparative testing by cyclic loading of rotator cuff suture anchors containing multiple high-strength sutures.
        Arthroscopy. 2010; 26: S134-S141
        • Stuart K.
        • Snyder S.
        Knot abrasion complication in SLAP repair [cover image].
        Arthroscopy. 2012; 28: A9
        • Ekelund A.
        Cartilage injuries in the shoulder joint caused by migration of suture anchors or mini screw.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1998; 7: 537-539
        • Elkousy H.A.
        • Sekiya J.K.
        • Stabile K.J.
        • McMahon P.J.
        A biomechanical comparison of arthroscopic sliding and sliding-locking knots.
        Arthroscopy. 2005; 21: 204-210

      Linked Article

      • Erratum
        ArthroscopyVol. 29Issue 8
        • Preview
          In the article “Biomechanical Performance of Traditional Arthroscopic Knots Versus Slippage-Proof Knots” by Clark et al. in the July 2013 issue (Arthroscopy 2013;29:1175-1181), the third author's surname was misspelled. The correct spelling is Sampatacos.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF
      • “Biomechanical Performance of Traditional Arthroscopic Knots Versus Slippage-Proof Knots”: A Word From the Developer of the Slippage-Proof (SP) Knot
        ArthroscopyVol. 29Issue 10
        • Preview
          As the developer of the slippage-proof (SP) knot,1 I read with great interest the article “Biomechanical Performance of Traditional Arthroscopic Knots Versus Slippage-Proof Knots” by Clark et al.2 First, I appreciate the authors for their use of the SP knot among various arthroscopic knots and congratulate their success both in clinical practice and in this scientific study with the SP knot. It is a great pleasure and honor for me that the SP knot receives recognition and has come to be used by many arthroscopic surgeons, and thus I could contribute a little to arthroscopic knowledge in the world.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF