Massey Patrick, Parker David, McClary Kaylan, Robinson James, Barton R Shane, Solitro Giovanni F
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center- Shreveport, 1501 Kings Highway, Shreveport, LA 71103, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center- Shreveport, 1501 Kings Highway, Shreveport, LA 71103, USA.
Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2020 Jul;77:105065. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2020.105065. Epub 2020 May 28.
Newer repair techniques of anterior cruciate ligament tears, including augmentation with internal brace, have shown promising clinical results. Few biomechanical studies exist comparing anterior cruciate ligament repair only versus repair with internal brace. The purpose of this study was to compare the load to failure and stiffness of anterior cruciate ligament repair with internal brace augmentation versus repair-only.
Proximal femoral avulsion type anterior cruciate ligament injuries were created in 20 cadaver knees. Anterior cruciate ligament repair-only or repair with internal brace was performed using arthroscopic tools. Load to failure and failure modes were collected, with calculations of stiffness and energy to failure performed.
The average load to failure for the internal brace group was higher than the repair-only group: 693 N (SD 248) versus 279 N (SD 91), P = .002. The stiffness and energy to failure values were higher for the internal brace group than the repair-only group: 83 N/mm versus 58 N/mm, P = .02 and 16.88 J (SD 12.44) versus 6.91 J (SD 2.49), P = .04, respectively. Failure modes differed between groups (P = .00097) with 80% failure in the repair-only due to suture pull through the anterior cruciate ligament and 90% failure in the internal brace group due to suture button pull through the femur.
There was higher load to failure, stiffness, and energy to failure for the internal brace group compared to the repair-only group, and a high positive correlation between bone density and load to failure for the internal brace group.
Anterior cruciate ligament repair with internal brace augmentation demonstrates significantly higher load to failure. It may be a useful adjunct to protect the anterior cruciate ligament repair from failure during the early stages of healing.
包括使用内置支撑物增强修复在内的前交叉韧带撕裂的新型修复技术已显示出良好的临床效果。很少有生物力学研究比较单纯前交叉韧带修复与使用内置支撑物修复的情况。本研究的目的是比较使用内置支撑物增强修复与单纯修复的前交叉韧带修复的失效载荷和刚度。
在20具尸体膝关节上造成股骨近端撕脱型前交叉韧带损伤。使用关节镜工具进行单纯前交叉韧带修复或使用内置支撑物修复。收集失效载荷和失效模式,并计算刚度和失效能量。
内置支撑物组的平均失效载荷高于单纯修复组:693N(标准差248)对279N(标准差91),P = 0.002。内置支撑物组的刚度和失效能量值高于单纯修复组:分别为83N/mm对58N/mm,P = 0.02;16.88J(标准差12.44)对6.91J(标准差2.49),P = 0.04。两组的失效模式不同(P = 0.00097),单纯修复组80%的失效是由于缝线从前交叉韧带中拉出,内置支撑物组90%的失效是由于缝线纽扣从股骨中拉出。
与单纯修复组相比,内置支撑物组的失效载荷、刚度和失效能量更高,并且内置支撑物组的骨密度与失效载荷之间存在高度正相关。
使用内置支撑物增强修复的前交叉韧带在失效载荷方面显著更高。它可能是在愈合早期保护前交叉韧带修复免于失效的有用辅助手段。