RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The biomechanical properties of coracoid fixation with a miniplate during the Latarjet procedure have not been described. PURPOSE: To determine the biomechanical properties of miniplate fixation for the Latarjet procedure compared with various screw fixation configurations. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 8 groups (n = 5 specimens per group) were tested at a screw insertion angle of 0°: (1) 3.75-mm single screw, (2) 3.75-mm double screw, (3) 3.75-mm double screw with washers, (4) 3.75-mm double screw with a miniplate, (5) 4.00-mm single screw, (6) 4.00-mm double screw, (7) 4.00-mm double screw with washers, and (8) 4.00-mm double screw with a miniplate. In addition, similar to groups 1 to 3 and 5 to 7, there were 30 additional specimens (n = 5 per group) tested at a screw insertion angle of 15° (groups 9-14). To maintain specimen uniformity, rigid polyurethane foam blocks were used. Testing parameters included a preload of 214 N for 10 seconds, cyclical loading from 184 to 736 N at 1 Hz for 100 cycles, and failure loading at a rate of 15 mm/min until 10 mm of displacement or specimen failure occurred. RESULTS: All single-screw constructs and 77% of 15° screw constructs failed before the completion of cyclical loading. Across all groups, group 8 (4.00-mm double screw with miniplate) demonstrated the highest maximum failure load (P < .001). There were no differences in failure loads among specimens with single-screw fixation (groups 1, 5, 9, and 12; P > .05). All specimens in groups 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 (insertion angle of 15°) had significantly lower maximum failure loads compared with specimens in groups 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 (insertion angle of 0°) (P < .001 for all). CONCLUSION: These results indicate significantly superior failure loads with the miniplate compared with all other constructs. Across all fixation techniques and screw sizes, constructs with screws inserted at 0° performed better than constructs with screws inserted at 15°. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of a miniplate for coracoid fixation during the Latarjet procedure may provide a more durable construct for the high-demand contact athlete.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: While the nonoperative management of Achilles tendon ruptures is a viable option, surgical repair is preferred in healthy and active populations. Recently, minimally invasive percutaneous repair methods with assistive devices have been developed. HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to biomechanically analyze 3 commercially available, minimally invasive percutaneous techniques compared with an open Achilles repair during a simulated, progressive rehabilitation program. It was hypothesized that no significant biomechanical differences would exist between repair techniques. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A simulated, midsubstance Achilles rupture was created 6 cm proximal to the calcaneal insertion in 33 fresh-frozen cadaveric ankles. Specimens were then randomly allocated to 1 of 4 different Achilles repair techniques: (1) open repair, (2) the Achillon Achilles Tendon Suture System, (3) the PARS Achilles Jig System, or (4) an Achilles Midsubstance SpeedBridge Repair variation. Repairs were subjected to a cyclic loading protocol representative of progressive postoperative rehabilitation: 250 cycles at 1 Hz for each loading range: 20-100 N, 20-200 N, 20-300 N, and 20-400 N. RESULTS: The open repair technique demonstrated significantly less elongation (5.2 ± 1.1 mm) when compared with all minimally invasive percutaneous repair methods after 250 cycles (P < .05). No significant differences were observed after 250 cycles between the Achillon, PARS, or SpeedBridge repairs, with mean displacements of 9.9 ± 2.2 mm, 12.2 ± 4.4 mm, and 10.0 ± 3.9 mm, respectively. When examined over smaller cyclic intervals, the majority of elongation, regardless of repair, occurred within the first 10 cycles. Within the first 10 cycles, open repairs achieved 71.2% of the total elongation observed after 250 cycles. Corresponding values for the Achillon, PARS, and SpeedBridge repairs were 81.8%, 77.9%, and 69.0%, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the total number of cycles to failure between minimally invasive percutaneous repairs and open repairs. Minor differences in the mechanism of failure were noted; however, the majority of all repairs failed at the suture-tendon interface. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive percutaneous repair techniques demonstrated a susceptibility to significant early repair elongation when compared with open repairs. However, the ultimate strengths of repairs (cycles to failure) were comparable across all techniques. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The reduced early elongation of open repairs suggests that patients treated with this technique may be able to progress through an earlier and/or more aggressive postoperative rehabilitation protocol with a lower risk of early irrevocable repair elongation or gapping about the repair site. However, in cases where cosmesis or wound-healing complications are of significant concern, minimally invasive percutaneous techniques provide a biomechanically reasonable alternative based on their repair strengths (cycles to failure). These repairs may need to be protected longer postoperatively to allow for biological healing and avoid early repair elongation and potential gapping between the healing tendon ends.