Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, The Thai Red Cross Society, Rama IV Rd, Khwaeng Pathum Wan, Khet Pathum Wan, Krung Thep Maha Nakhon, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand.
Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, The Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sci Rep. 2023 May 10;13(1):7572. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-34766-9.
The purpose of our biomechanical study was to assess load-to-failure, stiffness, gap formation following cyclic loading, and the failure mechanism for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair comparing the cortical suspensory button and knotless anchor suture. Eight Thiel's embalmed paired cadaveric knees from four cadavers were dissected. The specimens were assigned to undergo ACL repair either with cortical suspensory button or with knotless anchor suture. The Instron machine replicates cyclic loading and then determines the gap formation. Traction was applied until failure. The load-to-failure, stiffness, and modes of failure in both groups were recorded. The load-to-failure, stiffness, and gap formation were compared between the two groups using the student's t-test. The mean load-to-failure in the cortical suspensory button group was significantly higher than the knotless anchor suture group (212.96 ± 54.57 vs 44.57 ± 20.80, p value < 0.01). No statistically significant difference was found regarding gap formation following cyclic loading and stiffness between the cortical suspensory button group and the knotless anchor suture group. This biomechanical study showed a higher load-to-failure for the ACL repair with cortical suspensory button compared to ACL repair with knotless anchor suture, while no statistically significant difference was found regarding the gap formation following cyclic loading and the stiffness. The load-to-failure in both cortical suspensory button and knotless anchor suture are below regular daily activity load. Thus, an internal brace or external support is recommended during rehabilitation.
我们的生物力学研究目的是评估前交叉韧带(ACL)修复中皮质悬吊纽扣和无结锚钉缝线的失效负荷、刚度、循环加载后的间隙形成和失效机制。从四个尸体中解剖了 8 对 Thiel 防腐的尸体膝关节。将标本分为皮质悬吊纽扣组或无结锚钉缝线组进行 ACL 修复。Instron 机器复制循环加载,然后确定间隙形成。施加牵引力直至失效。记录两组的失效负荷、刚度和失效模式。使用学生 t 检验比较两组之间的失效负荷、刚度和间隙形成。皮质悬吊纽扣组的失效负荷明显高于无结锚钉缝线组(212.96±54.57 与 44.57±20.80,p 值<0.01)。在循环加载后的间隙形成和刚度方面,皮质悬吊纽扣组和无结锚钉缝线组之间没有统计学差异。这项生物力学研究表明,与无结锚钉缝线相比,皮质悬吊纽扣修复 ACL 的失效负荷更高,而在循环加载后的间隙形成和刚度方面没有统计学差异。皮质悬吊纽扣和无结锚钉缝线的失效负荷均低于日常活动负荷。因此,建议在康复期间使用内部支撑或外部支撑。