Biomechanical Evaluation of Cross-Pin Versus Interference Screw Tibial Fixation Using a Soft-Tissue Graft During Transtibial Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

被引:23
作者
Lee, Yong Seuk [1 ]
Wang, Joon Ho [1 ]
Bae, Ji Hoon [2 ]
Lim, Hong Chul [2 ]
Park, Jung Ho [1 ]
Ahn, Jin Hwan [3 ]
Bae, Tae Soo [4 ]
Lim, Bee-Oh [5 ]
机构
[1] Korea Univ, Ansan Hosp, Seoul, South Korea
[2] Korea Univ, Guro Hosp, Seoul, South Korea
[3] Sungkyunkwan Univ, Sch Med, Samsung Med Ctr, Seoul, South Korea
[4] Korea Orthoped & Rehabil Engn Ctr, Inchon, South Korea
[5] Seoul Natl Univ, Sports Sci Inst, Seoul, South Korea
关键词
Posterior cruciate ligament; Transtibial technique; Cross-pin fixation; Bio-TransFix; Biomechanics; HAMSTRING TENDON GRAFT; 2-YEAR FOLLOW-UP; FEMORAL FIXATION; MECHANICAL-PROPERTIES; TRANSFIX FIXATION; PART II; DEVICES; ALLOGRAFT; STRENGTH; SHEEP;
D O I
10.1016/j.arthro.2009.02.006
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose: This article reports the biomechanical demonstration of a technique for transtibial posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction using a soft-tissue graft with cross-pin fixation in the tibia and compares this with the biomechanical properties achieved with other methods. Methods: We used 5 paired cadaveric knees and another 10 tibias. Soft-tissue grafts were randomized. The femoral side of the anterior cruciate ligament was fixed with a Bio-TransFix device (Arthrex, Naples, FL) (group I), and the tibial side of the PCL was fixed with a Bio-TransFix device (group II). In another 10 tibias, tibial fixations were performed by use of a bio-interference screw (group III). Biomechanical testing was carried out on a testing machine, and maximal failure load, stiffness, and displacement were analyzed. The lengths of the slots of the TransFix device (Arthrex) from the near cortex were measured to compare the proper length of the device. Results: Maximal mean failure loads in groups I, II, and III were 549.3 +/- 55.4 N, 570.8 +/- 96.9 N, and 371.3 +/- 106.2 N, respectively, showing a significant difference (P = .0003). Stiffnesses were 47.52 +/- 16.84 N/mm, 59.14 +/- 17.09 N/mm, and 27.60 +/- 16.73 N/mm, respectively, showing a significant difference (P = .01). Mean displacements were 19.99 +/- 5.79 mm, 19.09 +/- 8.51 mm, and 17.58 +/- 7.10 mm, respectively, showing no significant difference (P = .7535). The mean lengths of the slots of the TransFix device of the femurs and tibias were similar at 20.3 +/- 1.25 mm and 20.2 +/- 1.32 mm, respectively, showing no significant difference (P = .8637). Conclusions: The transtibial technique by use of cross-pin tibial fixation with a Bio-TransFix device in PCL reconstruction provides stable fixation that is comparable to that achieved by use of conventional bio-interference screw fixation and femoral fixation in an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, an already well-established technique. Clinical Relevance: Biomechanically, tibial cross-pin fixation compares favorably with interference screw fixation and is useful when a graft is short. However, safety issues have not yet been resolved.
引用
收藏
页码:989 / 995
页数:7
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Mechanical properties of soft tissue femoral fixation devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
    Ahmad, CS
    Gardner, TR
    Groh, M
    Arnouk, J
    Levine, WN
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2004, 32 (03) : 635 - 640
  • [2] Posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Double-loop hamstring tendon autograft versus achilles tendon allograft - Clinical results of a minimum 2-year follow-up
    Ahn, JH
    Yoo, JC
    Wang, JH
    [J]. ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2005, 21 (08) : 965 - 969
  • [3] Femoral bioabsorbable cross-pin fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
    Ahn, Jin Hwan
    Park, Jun Sic
    Lee, Yong Seuk
    Cho, Young Jin
    [J]. ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2007, 23 (10) : 1093 - 1099
  • [4] Biomechanical properties of quadruple tendon and patellar tendon femoral fixation techniques
    Becker, R
    Voigt, D
    Stärke, C
    Heymann, M
    Wilson, GA
    Nebelung, W
    [J]. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2001, 9 (06) : 337 - 342
  • [5] A Pitfall of transfix fixation during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
    Choi, Nam-Hong
    Son, Kyung-Mo
    Victoroff, Brian N.
    [J]. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2008, 16 (05) : 479 - 481
  • [6] Comparison of initial mechanical properties of 4 hamstring graft femoral fixation systems using nonpermanent hardware for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction:: An in vitro animal study
    Espejo-Baena, A
    Ezquerro, F
    de la Blanca, AP
    Serrano-Fernandez, J
    Nadal, F
    Montañez-Heredia, E
    [J]. ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2006, 22 (04) : 433 - 440
  • [7] Mechanical analysis of fixation methods for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendon graft. An experimental study in sheep knees
    Fabbriciani, C
    Mulas, PD
    Ziranu, F
    Deriu, L
    Zarelli, D
    Milano, G
    [J]. KNEE, 2005, 12 (02) : 135 - 138
  • [8] Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Part II. Operative procedures and clinical correlations
    Fu, FH
    Bennett, CH
    Ma, CB
    Menetrey, J
    Lattermann, C
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2000, 28 (01) : 124 - 130
  • [9] Biomechanics of cellular solids
    Gibson, LJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 2005, 38 (03) : 377 - 399
  • [10] Cross-pin femoral fixation versus metal interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendons: Results of a controlled prospective randomized study with 2-year follow-up
    Harilainen, A
    Sandelin, J
    Jansson, KA
    [J]. ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2005, 21 (01) : 25 - 33