| Literature DB >> 35431634 |
Alexandre Zuccon1,2, Hamilton DA Rosa Pereira1, Sérgio Alexandre Alcântara Dos Santos3, Sérgio Luís Felisbino3, Luís Antônio Justulin Junior3, Daniele Cristina Cataneo1.
Abstract
Introduction: During open surgical dislocated hip reduction, several anatomical structures, such as the round ligament, are approached. However, there is controversy over both the possibility of preserving the ligament and its functional importance. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: Collagen; Hip dislocation; Models, animal; Rabbits; Round ligaments
Year: 2022 PMID: 35431634 PMCID: PMC8979362 DOI: 10.1590/1413-785220223001e235808
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Ortop Bras ISSN: 1413-7852 Impact factor: 0.513
Figure 1Stabilization with K-wire of the rabbit’s knee in complete extension.
Figure 2Radiographic image demonstrating left hip dislocation (white arrow) after 6 weeks of ipsilateral knee stabilization.
Figure 3Radiographic image of the right hip presenting 33% of subluxation (excluded from the study). The H-line passes through the triradiated cartilages of the hips (similar to the Hilgenreiner line), line B is drawn perpendicular to line H and on the acetabular ridge (similar to the Perkins line), Line C determines the medial limit of the femoral head and line A determines the lateral limit of the same. The percentage of migration was calculated as distance AB/AC x 100 = % of femur head migration (similar to that performed and described by Reimers, 1980).
Figure 4Flowchart of the sample.
Figure 5Representative photomicrographs of ligament sections submitted to Hematoxylin and Eosin staining of the control (a) and unstable (c) sides. These images were used for automatic detection of the percentage of area occupied by hematoxylin-stained cell nuclei in control (b) and unstable (d).
Comparison between control and unstable sides for the percentage of femoral head migration seen on radiographs.
| Percentage | Control | Unstable |
|---|---|---|
| Average | 1,44% | 75,19% |
| Median | 0% | 72,50% |
| SD* | 3,85 | 16,6 |
| Min | 0% | 50% |
| Max¥ | 15% | 100% |
| N** | 36 | 36 |
| P-value | <0,001 | |
* Standard Deviation. † Minimum value. ¥ Maximum value. ** Sample (number of rabbits).
Figure 6A) Picture of the dislocated hip. The head of the femur (blue arrow) outside the acetabular cavity and thickened elongated ligament (white arrow). B) Picture of the contralateral hip (control) of the same rabbit. Note the head of the femur (dotted black arrow) centered in the acetabulum (white arrow). The ligament on the unstable side was significantly higher.
Figure 7Chart of the biomechanical test showing “strength x deformation” curve on the control side (A) and unstable side (B). Strength was measured in Newtons (N), and deformation was measured in millimeters (mm).
Comparison between control and unstable sides for maximum strength (Smax) in Newtons.
| Strength | Control | Unstable |
|---|---|---|
| Average | 46.62 | 43.25 |
| Median | 46.85 | 40.6 |
| Standard Deviation | 15.56 | 16.25 |
| Q1* | 35.48 | 32.16 |
| Q3* | 56.36 | 51.16 |
| N** | 11 | 11 |
| P-value | 0.594 | |
*Interquartile value. **number of rabbits
Comparison between unstable and control sides for maximum deformation in millimeters (mm).
| Deformation | Control | Unstable |
|---|---|---|
| Average | 4.558 | 3.943 |
| Median | 4.574 | 3.712 |
| Standard Deviation | 1.194 | 1.888 |
| Q1* | 4.033 | 2.872 |
| Q3* | 4.960 | 4.906 |
| N** | 11 | 11 |
| P-value | 0.328 | |
*Interquartile value. **number of rabbits
Comparison of cellularity between the Control and Unstable sides through the parameters: mean, median, standard deviation, minimum value (Min), maximum value (Max), number of microscopic fields evaluated (N) and P value.
| Cellularity | Control | Unstable |
|---|---|---|
| Average | 3.87% | 6.83% |
| Median | 3.46% | 6.27% |
| Standard Deviation | 2.13% | 3.47% |
| Min | 1.36% | 1.51% |
| Max | 11.05% | 15.32% |
| N | 70 | 70 |
| P-value | <0,001 |
The mean values of MMP-2 (intermediate and active forms) were compared between the unstable and control sides using the following parameters in arbitrary units (AU): mean, standard deviation, coefficient of variation (CV), minimum value (Min), maximum value (Max), number of rabbits (N) and P value.
| Zymography (per thousand) | Mean | Standard Deviation | CV | Min | Max | N | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intermediate (MMP-2) | Control | 6.453 | 873 | 14% | 5.155 | 8.069 | 8 | 0.979 |
| Unstable | 6.472 | 1.900 | 29% | 3.102 | 9.088 | 8 | ||
| Active (MMP-2) | Control | 294.4 | 78 | 26% | 254 | 484 | 8 | 0.068 |
| Unstable | 481.8 | 228 | 47% | 247 | 872 | 8 | ||