Comparison of Suture Anchor Constructs in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Reconstruction: Assessing Clinical Outcome and...

Background: Cuff reconstructions vary due to different technical approaches by suture anchor manufacturers, as well as different suture construct configurations. Objectives: The main aim of this study is to primarily compare clinical outcomes and secondarily observe cost-effectiveness by assessing suture construct configurations in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). Methods: Using a retrospective local registry, we included patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair who had been implanted with different anchor configurations and different anchor manufacturers. Data analysis was conducted via multiple linear regression, primarily evaluating the relationship between clinical scores (OSS; SSV) and suture construct configurations, to analyze, monitor, and compare the postoperative clinical development. Total surgical costs were also obtained from the clinical billing department for analysis of various factors, including Adjusted Life Years (ALYs) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER), while controlling for sex, tear severity, and age. Results: A total of 317 patients were included in the final analysis, with a mean age at surgery of 60.1 ± 10.8 years, with 58% of patients being male. According to the Gerber tear severity classification, 23% of patients had a partial tear, 59% had at least one full-thickness tear, and the remaining 18% had a massive tear. Using linear regression models, the analysis of changes in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) as the dependent variable did not yield statistically significant results. The postoperative development of the measured clinical scores (SSV; OSS) did not show a significant difference comparing the two manufacturers (p = 0.11, p = 0.85). However, the model evaluating costs identified significant effects related to the type of anchor configuration and manufacturer. Regarding anchor configurations, utilizing anchor configuration 1 or 2 resulted in lower costs by up to CHF 254.51 compared to the reference anchor configuration 4 (p < 0.05), after controlling for age, sex, tear severity, and anchor configuration. Conclusions: The primary findings of this study indicate that although clinical outcomes are generally consistent across various rotator cuff reconstruction scenarios, while secondarily the cost implications can differ significantly and are mainly attributed to the differing numbers of anchors required for each configuration and price setting of the manufacturer. The study underscores the importance of suture construct configuration and manufacturer selection in controlling healthcare costs while maintaining quality patient care.