Suture Anchor-Based Quadriceps Tendon Repair May Result in Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes but Similar Failure Rates Compared to the Transosseous Tunnel Technique

The purpose of this study was to compare failure rates and patient-reported outcomes between transosseus (TO) suture and suture anchor (SA) quadriceps tendon repairs.Following institutional review board approval, patients who underwent primary repair for quadriceps tendon rupture with TO or SA techniques between January 2009 and August 2018 were identified from an institutional database and retrospectively reviewed. Patients were contacted for satisfaction (1-10 scale), current function (0-100 scale), failure (retear), and revision surgeries; International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS) were also collected to achieve a minimum of 2-year follow-up.Sixty-four patients (34 SA, 30 TO) were available by phone or e-mail at a mean of 4.81 ± 2.60 years postoperatively. There were 10 failures, for an overall failure rate of 15.6%. Failure incidence did not significantly differ between treatment groups (P = .83). Twenty-seven patients (47% of nonfailed patients) had completed patient-reported outcomes. The SA group reported higher subjective function (SA: 90 [85-100] vs TO: 85 [60-93], 95% CI of difference: -19.9 to -2.1 × 10There is no significant difference in failure rate between transosseus and suture anchor repairs for quadriceps tendon ruptures (P = .83). Most failures occur secondary to a traumatic reinjury within the first year postoperatively. Despite the lack of difference in failure rates, at final follow-up, patients who undergo suture anchor repair may report significantly greater subjective function and final IKDC, KOOS Pain, Quality of Life, and Sport scores.III, retrospective cohort study.