Bachmaier Samuel, Monaco Edoardo, Smith Patrick A, Frank Rachel M, Matzkin Elizabeth G, Wijdicks Coen A
Arthrex Department of Orthopedic Research, Munich, Germany.
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Sant'Andrea Hospital, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2023 Sep 29;11(9):23259671231201461. doi: 10.1177/23259671231201461. eCollection 2023 Sep.
Little is known about the stability of adjustable-loop devices (ALDs) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR).
To evaluate the stabilization behavior of 3 different types of ALDs for all-inside ACLR in a full-construct surgical technique-based manner.
Controlled laboratory study.
The femoral and tibial devices of Ultrabutton (Smith & Nephew), Infinity (Conmed), and TightRope II (Arthrex) were applied to quadrupled bovine tendon grafts (n = 8 each) with tibial-sided traction applied (350 N) for graft tensioning in a simulated fully extended knee. Knotless femoral graft fixation was based on either a suture-locking device (SLD; Ultrabutton), button-locking device (BLD; Infinity), or dual-locking device (DLD; TightRope II). All constructs were progressively loaded (50 N/500 cycles) from 50 to 300 N for 3000 cycles (0.75 Hz), including complete unloading situations and pull to failure (50 mm/min). Construct elongation, stiffness, and ultimate load were analyzed.
BLD showed significantly greater initial elongation (-2.69 ± 0.15 mm) than DLD (-3.19 ± 0.21 mm; < .001) but behaved similarly to SLD (-2.93 ± 0.23 mm). While DLD and SLD had the smallest initial elongation at the same significance level, they behaved opposite to each other with gradually increasing peak loading. At the end of testing, DLD had the lowest (-0.64 ± 0.32 mm) and SLD the highest (3.41 ± 1.01 mm) total elongation ( < .003 for both). SLD displayed significantly higher dynamic elongation (6.34 ± 0.23 mm) than BLD (3.21 ± 0.61 mm) and DLD (2.56 ± 0.31 mm) ( < .001 for both). The failure load of BLD (865.0 ± 183.8 N) was significantly lower ( < .026) compared with SLD and DLD (>1000 N). The predominant failure mode was suture rupture and tibial bone breakage with button subsidence (SLD, n = 4). No significant difference in stiffness between constructs was found.
While DLD successfully restricted critical construct elongation, BLD partially and SLD completely exceeded the clinical failure threshold (>3 mm) of plastic elongation with loop lengthening during increasing cyclic peak loading with complete unloading. Higher failure loads of SLD and DLD implants (>1000 N) were achieved at similar construct stiffness to BLD.
A detailed biomechanical understanding of the stabilization potential is pertinent to the continued evolution of ALDs to improve clinical outcomes.
对于用于前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)的可调环装置(ALD)的稳定性了解甚少。
以基于全结构手术技术的方式评估3种不同类型的ALD用于全关节内ACLR的稳定行为。
对照实验室研究。
将Ultrabutton(施乐辉公司)、Infinity(康美公司)和TightRope II(捷迈邦美公司)的股骨和胫骨装置应用于四倍体牛肌腱移植物(每组n = 8),在模拟完全伸展的膝关节中施加胫骨侧牵引力(350 N)以张紧移植物。无结股骨移植物固定基于缝合锁定装置(SLD;Ultrabutton)、纽扣锁定装置(BLD;Infinity)或双锁定装置(DLD;TightRope II)。所有结构从50 N逐步加载(50 N/500次循环)至300 N,共3000次循环(0.75 Hz),包括完全卸载情况并拉至破坏(50 mm/min)。分析结构伸长、刚度和极限载荷。
BLD的初始伸长(-2.69±0.15 mm)显著大于DLD(-3.19±0.21 mm;P <.001),但与SLD(-2.93±0.23 mm)表现相似。虽然DLD和SLD在相同显著性水平下初始伸长最小,但随着峰值载荷逐渐增加,它们的表现相反。在测试结束时,DLD的总伸长最低(-0.64±0.32 mm),SLD最高(3.41±1.01 mm)(两者P <.003)。SLD的动态伸长(6.34±0.23 mm)显著高于BLD(3.21±0.61 mm)和DLD(2.56±0.31 mm)(两者P <.001)。BLD的破坏载荷(865.0±183.8 N)显著低于SLD和DLD(>1000 N)(P <.026)。主要的破坏模式是缝合线断裂和纽扣下沉导致的胫骨骨折(SLD,n = 4)。各结构之间的刚度未发现显著差异。
虽然DLD成功限制了关键结构伸长,但在完全卸载的情况下,随着循环峰值载荷增加,BLD部分且SLD完全超过了塑性伸长的临床失败阈值(>3 mm),出现环延长。在与BLD相似的结构刚度下,SLD和DLD植入物实现了更高的破坏载荷(>1000 N)。
对稳定潜力的详细生物力学理解对于ALD的持续发展以改善临床结果至关重要。