Cyclic and Load-to-Failure Properties of All-Suture Anchors in Human Cadaveric Shoulder Greater Tuberosities


      The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cyclic displacement, stiffness, and ultimate load to failure of 3 all-suture anchors in human cadaveric greater tuberosities.


      Three all-suture anchors indicated for rotator cuff repair were tested in 14 matched pairs of human cadaver fresh-frozen humeri. Anchors were inserted at 3 locations from anterior to posterior along the greater tuberosity and placed 5 mm from the articular margin. The constructs were cycled from 10 to 60 N at 1 Hz for 200 cycles. The anchors that survived cycling were then subjected to a single pull to failure test. A Kruskal-Wallis 1-way analysis of variance on ranks was performed to compare the displacement, stiffness, and ultimate load to failure of the different anchors tested.


      One matched pair was excluded because of poor bone quality; therefore, 13 matched pairs were included in the study. After 20, 100, and 200 cycles, there was no difference in median displacement between the anchors tested (P = .23, P = .21, P = .18, respectively). The median ultimate load-to-failure between the Iconix (295.2 N, 95% confidence interval [CI], 125-762.2), JuggerKnot (287.6 N, 95% CI, 152.9-584.4), and Q-fix (333.3 N, 95% CI, 165.0-671.9) showed no statistically significant difference (P = .58). After 20, 100, and 200 cycles, there was no difference in median stiffness between the anchors tested (P = .41, P = .19, P = .26 respectively). Displacement greater than 5 mm occurred in 0 Iconix anchors (0%), 1 JuggerKnot anchor (3.64%), and 2 Q-fix anchors (7.69%). One JuggerKnot anchor failed by anchor pullout during cyclic loading.


      When tested in human cadaveric humeral greater tuberosities 3 all-suture anchors, the 2.9-mm JuggerKnot, the 2.8-mm Q-fix, and the 2.3-mm Iconix, showed no significant differences in median displacement or stiffness after 20, 100, or 200 cycles or in median ultimate load to failure. Although not statistically significant, the Iconix was the only anchor tested to have no failures, whereas the JuggerKnot had both a clinical and catastrophic failure and the Q-fix had 2 clinical failures.

      Level of Evidence

      Level V, Controlled Laboratory Study.
      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 to Arthroscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Craft D.V.
        • Moseley J.B.
        • Cawley P.W.
        • Noble P.C.
        Fixation strength of rotator cuff repairs with suture anchors and the transosseous suture technique.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1996; 5: 32-40
        • Anderson K.
        • Boothby M.
        • Ashenbrener D.
        • van Holsbeeck M.
        Outcome and structural integrity after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using 2 rows of fixation: Minimum 2-year follow-up.
        Am J Sports Med. 2006; 34: 1899-1905
        • Dierckman B.D.
        • Ni J.J.
        • Karzel R.P.
        • Getelman M.H.
        Excellent healing rates and patient satisfaction scores after arthroscopic repair of medium to large rotator cuff tears with a single-row technique augmented with bone marrow vents.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018; 26: 136-145
        • Katthagen J.C.
        • Bucci G.
        • Moatche G.
        • Tahal D.S.
        • Millett P.J.
        Improved outcomes with arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears: A systematic review.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018; 26: 113-124
        • Pennington W.T.
        • Gibbons D.J.
        • Bartz B.A.
        • et al.
        Comparative analysis of single-row versus double-row repair of rotator cuff tears.
        Arthroscopy. 2010; 26: 1419-1426
        • Visscher L.E.
        • Jeffery C.
        • Gilmour T.
        • Anderson L.
        • Couzens G.
        The history of suture anchors in orthopaedic surgery.
        Clin Biomech. 2019; 61: 70-78
        • Ono Y.
        • Woodmass J.M.
        • Nelson A.A.
        • Boorman R.S.
        • Thornton G.M.
        • Lo I.K.
        Knotless anchors with sutures external to the anchor body may be at risk for suture cutting through osteopenic bone.
        Bone Joint Res. 2016; 5: 269-275
        • Dhinsa B.S.
        • Bharmra J.S.
        • Aramberri-Gutierrez M.
        • Kochhar T.
        Mid-term clinical outcomes following rotator cuff repair using all-suture anchors.
        J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2019; 10: 241-243
        • Bernardoni E.D.
        • Frank R.M.
        • Veera S.S.
        • et al.
        Biomechanical analysis of medial-row all-suture suture anchor fixation for rotator cuff repair in a pair-matched cadaveric model.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 1370-1376
        • Ruder J.A.
        • Dickinson E.Y.
        • Peindl R.D.
        • Habet N.A.
        • Trofa D.P.
        • Fleischli J.E.
        Cyclic and load-to-failure properties of all-suture anchors in human cadaveric shoulder glenoid bone.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 1954-1959
        • Pfeiffer F.M.
        • Smith M.J.
        • Cook J.L.
        • Kuroki K.
        The histological response of two commercially available small glenoid anchors for use in labral repair.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014; 23: 1156-1161
        • Willemot L.
        • Elfadalli R.
        • Jaspars K.C.
        • et al.
        Radiological and clinical outcomes or arthroscopic labral repair with all-suture anchors.
        Acta Orthop Belg. 2016; 82: 174-178
        • Ro K.
        • Pancholi S.
        • Son H.S.
        • Rhee Y.G.
        Perianchor cyst formation after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using all-suture-type, bioabsorbable-type, and PEEK-type anchors.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 2284-2292
        • Lee J.H.
        • Park I.
        • Hyun H.S.
        • Kim S.W.
        • Shin S.J.
        Comparison of clinical and computed tomography analysis for tunnel diameter after arthroscopic Bankart repair with the all-suture anchor and the biodegradable suture anchor.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 1351-1358
        • Burks R.T.
        • Crim J.
        • Brown N.
        • Fink B.
        • Greis P.E.
        A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing arthroscopic single- and double-row rotator cuff repair: Magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical evaluation.
        Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37: 674-682
        • Burkhart S.S.
        The Deadman theory of suture anchors: observations along a south Texas fence line.
        Arthroscopy. 1995; 11: 119-123
        • Barber F.A.
        • Herbert M.A.
        Cyclic loading biomechanical analysis of the pullout strengths of rotator cuff and glenoid anchors: 2013 update.
        Arthroscopy. 2013; 29: 832-844
        • 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
        • Barber F.A.
        • Hapa O.
        • Bynum A.J.
        Comparative testing by cyclic loading of rotator cuff suture anchors containing multiple high-strength sutures.
        Arthroscopy. 2010; 26: S134-S141
        • Paschos N.K.
        • Brand J.C.
        • Rossi M.J.
        • Lubowitz J.
        Methods to improve arthroscopic and orthopaedic biomechanical investigations: A few of our favorite things.
        Arthroscopy. 2019; 35: 2967-2969
        • Cummins C.A.
        • Murrell G.A.
        Mode of failure for rotator cuff repair with suture anchors identified at revision surgery.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003; 12: 128-133
        • Mazzocca A.D.
        • Millett P.J.
        • Guanche C.A.
        • Santangelo S.A.
        • Arciero R.A.
        Arthroscopic single-row versus double-row suture anchor rotator cuff repair.
        Am J Sports Med. 2005; 33: 1861-1868
        • Nagra N.S.
        • Zargar N.
        • Smith R.D.
        • Carr A.J.
        Mechanical properties of all-suture anchors for rotator cuff repair.
        Bone Joint Res. 2017; 6: 82-89
        • Goschka A.M.
        • Hafer J.S.
        • Reynolds K.A.
        • et al.
        Biomechanical comparison of traditional anchors to all-suture anchors in a double-row rotator cuff repair cadaver model.
        Clin Biomech. 2015; 30: 808-813
        • Ntalos D.
        • Sellenschloh K.
        • Huber G.
        • et al.
        Conventional rotator cuff versus all-suture anchor – A biomechanical study focusing on the insertion angle in an unlimited cyclic model.
        PLoS One. 2019; 14e0225648
        • Barber F.A.
        • Herbert M.A.
        All-suture anchors: Biomechanical analysis of pullout strength, displacement, and failure mode.
        Arthroscopy. 2017; 33: 1113-1121
        • Galland A.
        • Airaudi S.
        • Gravier R.
        • Le Cann S.
        • Chabrand P.
        • Argenson J.N.
        Pullout strength of all suture anchors in the repair of rotator cuff tears: A biomechanical study.
        Int Orthop. 2013; 37: 2017-2023
        • Douglass N.P.
        • Behn A.W.
        • Safran M.R.
        Cyclic and load to failure properties of all-suture anchors in synthetic acetabular and glenoid cancellous bone.
        Arthroscopy. 2017; 33: 977-985.e5