Editorial Commentary: Taking a “PEEK” at Suture Anchor Composition following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: Is Bio Really Better?

Abstract The advent of modern suture anchor technology has not only revolutionized arthroscopic treatment options for management of complex shoulder pathology, but also engendered a materials science quest to identify the ultimate composition and design. What began as an open procedure with transosseous suture fixation has evolved dramatically with the widespread adoption of an arthroscopic, anchor-based technique for rotator cuff repair. Currently, a litany of commercially available “hard” and “soft” anchors are flooding the market, with limited qualitative comparisons to suggest superiority of one type. Ideally, suture anchor design should permit preservation of native glenohumeral bone stock with gradual osseointegration, limit disruption of local tissue homeostasis, and maintain time-zero mechanical strength until soft-tissue healing has occurred. At present, a vented, open-anchor architecture may facilitate better biologic incorporation with increased bony ingrowth through access to marrow elements, although these radiographic advantages have not conferred any clinically meaningful differences for our rotator cuff repair patients. For anchor composition, the jury is still out, and we need to continue to critically evaluate for perianchor cyst formation and longer term remodeling. In fact, the true merits of increased bony ingrowth and limited osteolysis may only be realized at the time of revision rotator cuff repair, during which prior implant position or secondary cystic change may further dictate suture anchor design, size, and placement.