Biomechanical Comparison of Five Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Techniques

被引:26
作者
Nuelle, Clayton W. [1 ,2 ]
Milles, Jeffrey L. [1 ]
Pfeiffer, Ferris M. [1 ,2 ]
Stannard, James P. [1 ,2 ]
Smith, Patrick A. [1 ,3 ]
Kfuri, Mauricio, Jr. [1 ,2 ]
Cook, James L. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Missouri, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Columbia, MO USA
[2] Univ Missouri, Thompson Lab Regenerat Orthopaed, Columbia, MO USA
[3] Columbia Orthopaed Grp, Columbia, MO USA
关键词
posterior cruciate ligament; autograft; allograft; reconstruction techniques; biomechanics; DOUBLE-BUNDLE RECONSTRUCTION; TIBIAL INLAY; SINGLE-BUNDLE; SURGICAL-TECHNIQUE; GRAFT FIXATION; KNEE LAXITY; PART;
D O I
10.1055/s-0036-1593625
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
No surgical technique recreates native posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) biomechanics. We compared the biomechanics of five different PCL reconstruction techniques versus the native PCL. Cadaveric knees (n = 20) were randomly assigned to one of five reconstruction techniques: Single bundle all-inside arthroscopic inlay, single bundle all-inside suspensory fixation, single bundle arthroscopic-assisted open onlay (SB-ONL), double bundle arthroscopic-assisted open inlay (DB-INL), and double bundle all-inside suspensory fixation (DB-SUSP). Each specimen was potted and connected to a servo-hydraulic load frame for testing in three conditions: PCL intact, PCL deficient, and PCL reconstructed. Testing consisted of a posterior force up to 100 N at a rate of 1 N/s at four knee flexion angles: 10, 30, 60, and 90 degrees. Three material properties were measured under each condition: load to 5 mm displacement, maximal displacement, and stiffness. Data were normalized to the native PCL, compared across techniques, compared with all PCL-intact knees and to all PCL-deficient knees using one-way analysis of variance. For load to 5 mm displacement, intact knees required significantly (p < 0.03) more load at 30 degrees of flexion than all reconstructions except the DB-SUSP. At 60 degrees of flexion, intact required significantly (p < 0.01) more load than all others except the SB-ONL. At 90 degrees, intact, SB-ONL, DB-INL, and DB-SUSP required significantly more load (p < 0.05). Maximal displacement testing showed the intact to have significantly (p < 0.02) less laxity than all others except the DB-INL and DB-SUSP at 60 degrees. At 90 degrees the intact showed significantly (p < 0.01) less laxity than all others except the DB-SUSP. The intact was significantly stiffer than all others at 30 degrees (p < 0.03) and 60 degrees (p < 0.01). Finally, the intact was significantly (p < 0.05) stiffer than all others except the DB-SUSP at 90 degrees. No technique matched the exact properties of the native PCL, but the double bundle reconstructions more closely recreated the native biomechanics immediately after implantation, with the DB-SUSP coming closest to the native ligament. This study contributes new data for consideration in PCL reconstruction technique choice.
引用
收藏
页码:523 / 531
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Biomechanical Evaluation of Pediatric Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Techniques
    Kennedy, Abbey
    Coughlin, Dezba G.
    Metzger, Melodie F.
    Tang, Ronald
    Pearle, Andrew D.
    Lotz, Jeffrey C.
    Feeley, Brian T.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2011, 39 (05) : 964 - 971
  • [22] Transtibial Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
    Fanelli, Gregory C.
    JOURNAL OF KNEE SURGERY, 2021, 34 (05) : 486 - 492
  • [23] The biomechanical characteristics of arthroscopic tibial inlay techniques for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: in vitro comparison of tibial graft tunnel placement
    Karl Peter Benedetto
    Thomas Hoffelner
    Michael Osti
    International Orthopaedics, 2014, 38 : 2363 - 2368
  • [24] Biomechanical Evaluation of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Quadriceps Versus Achilles Tendon Bone Block Allograft
    Forsythe, Brian
    Haro, Marc S.
    Bogunovic, Ljiljana
    Collins, Michael J.
    Arns, Thomas A.
    Trella, Katie J.
    Shewman, Elizabeth F.
    Verma, Nikhil N.
    Bach, Bernard R., Jr.
    ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2016, 4 (08)
  • [25] Biomechanical Analysis of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Aperture Femoral Fixation
    Mutnal, Amar
    Leo, Brian M.
    Vargas, Luis
    Colbrunn, Robb W.
    Butler, Robert S.
    Uribe, John W.
    ORTHOPEDICS, 2015, 38 (01) : 9 - 16
  • [26] Primary stability of three posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures: A biomechanical in vitro study
    Kitamura, N
    Yasuda, K
    Tohyama, H
    Yamanaka, M
    Tanabe, Y
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2005, 21 (08) : 970 - 978
  • [27] POSTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION IN SKELETALLY IMMATURE ATHLETES
    Adriani, E.
    Cialdella, S.
    Terrando, S.
    Giusti, S.
    Adriani, M.
    Maccauro, G.
    JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL REGULATORS AND HOMEOSTATIC AGENTS, 2019, 33 (02) : 51 - 56
  • [28] Arthroscopic tibial inlay for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
    Campbell, Robert Brick
    Jordan, Susan S.
    Sekiya, Jon K.
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2007, 23 (12) : 1356.e1 - 1356.e4
  • [29] Modified tibial tunnel placement for single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction reduces the "Killer Turn" in a biomechanical model
    Wang, Zhiqiang
    Xiong, Yan
    Chen, Gang
    Tang, Xin
    Li, Qi
    Zhang, Zhong
    Shang, Xiaoke
    Yang, Yuan
    Sulaiman, Yaxiaer
    Li, Jian
    MEDICINE, 2019, 98 (52)
  • [30] Comparison of autograft and allograft tendons in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction A meta-analysis
    Tian, Peng
    Hu, Wen-qing
    Li, Zhi-jun
    Sun, Xiao-lei
    Ma, Xin-long
    MEDICINE, 2017, 96 (27)