Literature DB >> 17554103

Comparison of tibial graft fixation between simulated arthroscopic and open inlay techniques for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

R Brick Campbell1, Alec Torrie, Aaron Hecker, Jon K Sekiya.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Techniques for reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament continue to evolve to improve clinical results. Recent arthroscopic reconstruction methods using tibial inlay grafts require suture fixation to avoid a posterior approach to the knee. HYPOTHESIS: Early strength of the tibial fixation of posterior cruciate ligament inlay grafts, designed for an arthroscopic approach and using suture fixation, is not significantly different than that of open technique grafts using screw fixation. STUDY
DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.
METHODS: Six paired human tibias were randomized to a reconstruction using an open inlay technique with two 4.0-mm cancellous lag screws or an instrumented technique suitable for an all-arthroscopic approach using 2 No. 5 Ethibond sutures tied over a button on the anterior tibial cortex. Cyclic testing of each construct was done before loading to failure.
RESULTS: The loads for each group at 3-mm displacement and at 5-mm displacement were not found to be significantly different. Ultimate load for the screw group was 762 N and for the suture group was 582 N (P =.31). Stiffness was 89.8 N/mm for the screw inlays and 85.1 N/mm for the suture inlays (P =.68). Cyclic testing demonstrated no advantages of screw fixation over sutures. No suture failure was noted.
CONCLUSION: The suture fixation technique for tibial inlay posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction appears to approximate the early strength of screw fixation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Arthroscopic techniques for tibial inlay reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament requiring suture fixation may offer similar initial biomechanical fixation as current open inlay techniques without the need for an open posterior knee approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17554103     DOI: 10.1177/0363546507302216

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  14 in total

1.  Biomechanical properties of femoral posterior cruciate ligament fixations.

Authors:  M Ettinger; M Petri; K T Haag; S Brand; A Dratzidis; C Hurschler; C Krettek; M Jagodzinski
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  The predictive effect of anatomic femoral and tibial graft tunnel placement in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on functional and radiological outcome.

Authors:  Michael Osti; Doris Hierzer; Alessa Krawinkel; Thomas Hoffelner; Karl Peter Benedetto
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  CORR Insights®: No Clinically Important Difference in Knee Scores or Instability Between Transtibial and Inlay Techniques for PCL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Surgical management of PCL injuries: indications, techniques, and outcomes.

Authors:  Scott R Montgomery; Jared S Johnson; David R McAllister; Frank A Petrigliano
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2013-06

5.  Is the all-arthroscopic tibial inlay double-bundle PCL reconstruction a viable option in multiligament knee injuries?

Authors:  Alexander E Weber; Benjamin Bissell; Edward M Wojtys; Jon K Sekiya
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  The biomechanical characteristics of arthroscopic tibial inlay techniques for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: in vitro comparison of tibial graft tunnel placement.

Authors:  Karl Peter Benedetto; Thomas Hoffelner; Michael Osti
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Skeletal imaging following reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament: in vivo comparison of fluoroscopy, radiography, and computed tomography.

Authors:  Michael Osti; Alessa Krawinkel; Karl Peter Benedetto
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  [Implant-free tibial fixations of the posterior cruciate ligament. Development and biomechanical testing].

Authors:  T Wehrhahn; M Ettinger; M Petri; E Liodakis; C Hurschler; U-V Albrecht; C Krettek; M Jagodzinski
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.000

9.  The fixation strength of tibial PCL press-fit reconstructions.

Authors:  M Ettinger; T Wehrhahn; M Petri; E Liodakis; G Olender; U-V Albrecht; C Hurschler; C Krettek; M Jagodzinski
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-06-22       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Comparison of the operation of arthroscopic tibial inlay and traditional tibial inlay for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Daifeng Lu; Mochao Xiao; Yongyun Lian; Yong Zhou; Xuefeng Liu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-10-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.