Literature DB >> 24321231

A biomechanical comparison of anterior cruciate ligament suspensory fixation devices in a porcine cadaver model.

Lucas Rylander1, Jeffrey Brunelli1, Michal Taylor1, Todd Baldini2, Byron Ellis1, Monica Hawkins3, Eric McCarty1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Suspensory fixation use during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction has increased due to ease of use and high pullout strength. We hypothesize that there are no significant differences in biomechanical performance among four types of suspensory fixation devices: Stryker VersiTomic G-Lok, Smith & Nephew Endobutton, Biomet ToggleLoc, and Arthrex RetroButton.
METHODS: Forty fresh frozen porcine femurs and flexor digitorum profundus tendons were obtained. Each tendon graft was sized to 8.5mm or 9.0mm. Ten of each device were used to fix the grafts in the femur at the 2 o'clock (left) or 10 o'clock (right) position. The graft-femur complex was secured to a servohydraulic test machine in line with the femoral tunnel. The graft was cyclically loaded from 50 to 250 N for 1000 cycles at 1 Hz then loaded to failure at 20mm/min. Actuator load and displacement were recorded. Data were analyzed with multiple one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD post-hoc tests. Bonferroni correction was applied resulting in P ≤ 0.005 considered statistically significant for ANOVA, P ≤ 0.05 for Tukey.
FINDINGS: There were no significant differences in cyclic displacement among any of the groups (P=0.43). The only significant difference in failure properties is the Endobutton exhibited at least 50% greater displacement at failure than the other three devices.
INTERPRETATION: Suspensory femoral soft tissue fixation devices are biomechanically similar with respect to failure load but differ in failure displacement. However, there was no significant difference in displacement after cyclic loading. All four fixation devices should withstand the forces associated with daily activities without failure.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery; Knee arthroscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24321231     DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.11.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)        ISSN: 0268-0033            Impact factor:   2.063


  4 in total

1.  Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel Loop Retention Mechanism for Cortical Graft Fixation in ACL Reconstruction.

Authors:  Tobias Götschi; George Rosenberg; Xiang Li; Chen Zhang; Elias Bachmann; Jess G Snedeker; Sandro F Fucentese
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2020-02-25

2.  A biomechanical comparison of all-inside cruciate ligament graft preparation techniques.

Authors:  Colter R Wichern; Kathryn C Skoglund; Joseph G O'Sullivan; Anora K Burwell; Joseph T Nguyen; Andrea Herzka; Jacqueline M Brady
Journal:  J Exp Orthop       Date:  2018-10-10

3.  Biomechanical analysis of a double fixation method for tendon graft in porcine tibia - using an interference screw plus staple.

Authors:  Luis Antônio de Ridder Bauer; Hermes Augusto Agottani Alberti; Vitor Gustavo de Paiva Corotti; Ana Paula Gebert de Oliveira Franco; Edmar Stieven Filho; Luiz Antônio Munhoz da Cunha
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2018-07-27

4.  Stratifying the mechanical performance of a decellularized xenogeneic tendon graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction as a function of graft diameter: An animal study.

Authors:  Samuel Whitaker; Jennifer H Edwards; Stephen Guy; Eileen Ingham; Anthony Herbert
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2019-12-03       Impact factor: 5.853

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.