Screw fixation for syndesmotic injury is stronger and provides more contact area of the joint surface than TightRope®: A biomechanical study.

BACKGROUND: The rupture of syndesmotic ligaments is treated with a screw fixation as the gold standard. An alternative is the stabilization with a TightRope®. A couple of studies investigated the different clinical outcome and some even looked at the stability in the joint, but none of them examined the occurring pressure after fixation. OBJECTIVE: Is there a difference in pressure inside the distal tibiofibular joint between a screw fixation and a TightRope®? Does the contact area differ in these two treatment options? METHODS: This biomechanical study aimed to investigate the differences in fixation of the injured syndesmotic ligaments by using a fixation with one quadricortical screw versus singular TightRope® both implanted 1 cm above the joint. By using 12 adult lower leg cadaveric specimens and pressure recording sensor, we recorded the pressure across the distal tibiofibular joint. Additionally we measured the contact surface area across the joint. RESULTS: The mean of the pressure across the distal tibiofibular joint from the start of the insertion of the fixation device to the complete fixation was 0.05 Pascal for the TightRope® and 0.1 for the screw (P= 0.016). The mean of the maximum pressure across the joint (after completion of fixation and releasing the reduction clamp) was 1.750 mega Pascal with the screw fixation and 0.540 mega Pascal with TightRope® (P= 0.008). The mean of the measured contact area of the distal tibiofibular joint after fixation was 250 mm2 in the TightRope® group and of 355 mm2 in the screw fixation (P= 0.123). CONCLUSIONS: The screw fixation is stronger and provides a larger surface contact area, which leads us to the conclusion that it provides a better stability in the joint. While previous clinical studies did not show significant clinical difference between the two methods of fixation, the biomechanical construct varied. Long term clinical studies are required to establish whether this biomechanical distinction will contribute to various clinical outcomes.

Monocortical fixation of the coracoid in the Latarjet procedure is significantly weaker than bicortical fixation.

PURPOSE: A crucial step of the Latarjet procedure is the fixation of the coracoid process onto the glenoid. Multiple problems associated with the fixation have been described, including lesions of the suprascapular nerve due to prominence of the screw or bicortical drilling. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether monocortical fixation, without perforating the posterior glenoid cortex, would provide sufficient graft stability. METHODS: Coracoid transfer was performed in 14 scapula models (Sawbones®, Composite Scapula, 4th generation). Two groups were assigned: in one group, fixation was achieved with two screws that did not perforate the posterior cortex of the glenoid neck (monocortical fixation), in the other group, fixation was achieved with perforation of the posterior cortex (bicortical fixation). The ultimate failure load and mode of failure were evaluated biomechanically. RESULTS: Monocortical fixation was a significantly weaker construct than bicortical fixation (median failure load 221 N, interquartile range 211-297 vs. median failure load 423 N, interquartile range 273-497; p = 0.017). Failure was either due to a pullout of the screws from the socket or a fracture of the glenoid. There was no significant difference in the mode of failure between the two groups (n.s.). CONCLUSION: Monocortical fixation was significantly weaker than bicortical fixation. However, bicortical drilling and overly long screws may jeopardize the suprascapular nerve. Thus, anatomic knowledge about the safe zone at the posterior rim of the glenoid is crucial. Until further research has evaluated, if the inferior stability is clinically relevant, clinicians should be cautious to use a monocortical fixation technique for the coracoid graft.

The lasso-loop, lasso-mattress and simple-cinch stitch for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: are there biomechanical differences?

PURPOSE: Various stitching techniques have been described to facilitate arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears. The aim of the present study was to compare the biomechanical properties of the lasso-loop, lasso-mattress and simple-cinch stitch for rotator cuff repair. METHODS: Twelve infraspinatus tendons were harvested from sheep and split in half. The tendons were randomized into three different stitch configuration groups for biomechanical testing: lasso-loop, lasso-mattress and simple-cinch stitch. Each specimen was first cyclically loaded on a universal materials testing machine under force control from 5 to 30 N at 0.25 Hz for twenty cycles. Then, each specimen was loaded to failure under displacement control at a rate of 1 mm/s. Cyclic elongation, peak-to-peak displacement and ultimate tensile load were reported as mean ± standard error and compared using one way analysis of variance. The type of failure was recorded. RESULTS: No differences in cyclic elongation (1.31 ± 0.09 mm for the simple-cinch vs. 1.49 ± 0.07 mm for the lasso-mattress vs. 1.61 ± 0.09 mm for the lasso-loop stitch, p = 0.063) or peak-to-peak displacement (0.58 ± 0.04 mm for the simple-cinch, 0.50 ± 0.03 mm for the lasso-mattress and 0.62 ± 0.06 mm for the lasso-loop stitch, p = 0.141) were seen between all tested stitch configurations. In the load-to-failure test, the simple cinch stitch (149.38 ± 11.89 N) and the lasso-mattress (149.38 ± 10.33 N) stitch demonstrated significantly higher ultimate load than the lasso-loop stitch (65.88 ± 4.75 N, p < 0.001). All stitch configurations failed with suture pull out. CONCLUSIONS: The lasso-mattress and the simple-cinch stitch showed similar biomechanical properties with significant higher tensile loads needed for failure than the lasso-loop stitch.

Biomechanical evaluation of the simple cinch stitch for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

BACKGROUND: The tissue-suture interface is described as the most vulnerable and susceptible area in the muscle-tendon-bone construction of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Various stitching techniques have been described to enhance the strength, fixation and stability of the repair, but technical and biomechanical challenges remain. Purpose was to examine the biomechanical properties of the simple cinch stitch in comparison to other stitches commonly used for rotator cuff repair. METHODS: Infraspinatus tendons were harvested from sheep and split in half. The tendons were randomized into five different stitch configuration groups for biomechanical testing: simple stitch; horizontal stitch; FiberChain®; simple cinch stitch; and modified Mason-Allen stitch. Each specimen was first cyclically loaded on a universal materials testing machine under force control from 5 to 30N at 0.25Hz for twenty cycles. Then, each specimen was loaded to failure under displacement control at a rate of 1mm/s. Cyclic elongation, peak-to-peak displacement and ultimate tensile load were measured. The type of failure was recorded. FINDINGS: No differences in cyclic elongation or peak-to-peak displacement were seen between stitch configurations. In the load-to-failure test, the simple cinch stitch demonstrated significantly higher ultimate load than the simple and the horizontal stitch configurations. The comparison to the FiberChain® Suture revealed no statistical significant differences. The FiberChain® Suture demonstrated significantly higher ultimate load than the simple stitch. No statistical significance could be demonstrated in comparison to the horizontal stitch or the simple cinch stitch. The ultimate tensile load of the modified Mason-Allen stitch was significantly higher than that of the other stitch configurations. INTERPRETATION: The simple cinch stitch has an ultimate tensile load comparable to the FiberChain® suture and is superior to the simple stitch and the horizontal stitch. The major advantage of the simple cinch technique is that it is possible to perform the stitch entirely arthroscopically, without the need to perforate the tissue a second time or to use special suture materials. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.

Are porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons suitable graft substitutes for human hamstring tendons in biomechanical in vitro-studies?

INTRODUCTION: Although a plenty of studies exist assessing the strength of ligamentous fixation techniques using porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons as graft substitutes for human hamstring tendons, there is no biomechanical study comparing these two tendons. To interpret the results obtained with porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons, knowledge of their biomechanical properties is essential. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of human hamstring tendons and porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of six human hamstring tendons and six porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons were analysed in this study. Quadruple-bundle human hamstring tendons and double-bundle porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons with a diameter of 9 mm were used. Specimens were placed into a tensile loading fixation of a servohydraulic testing machine. Biomechanical analysis included pretensioning of the constructs at 50 N for 10 min following cyclic loading of 1500 cycles between 50 and 200 N at 0.5 Hz for measurement of elongation. Subsequently, ultimate failure load and failure mode analysis were performed with a ramp speed of 20 mm/min. RESULTS: Human hamstring tendons showed significantly higher maximum load to failure values compared to porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons (1597 ± 179.6 N vs. 1109 ± 101.9 N; p = 0.035). Human hamstring tendons yielded significantly lower initial elongation during preload, but not during cyclical loading. CONCLUSIONS: When porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons are used as graft substitutes for human hamstring tendons in biomechanical studies, maximum load to failure is underestimated while elongation is comparable to that of human hamstring tendons. Transferring results of biomechanical studies into clinical practice, the lower maximum load to failure of porcine flexor digitorum profundus tendons needs to be taken into consideration.

Biomechanical comparison of fixation techniques for medial collateral ligament anatomical augmented repair.

PURPOSE: Although the majority of medial collateral ligament (MCL) ruptures can be treated conservatively with good results, some injuries require operative treatment. Besides MCL reconstruction, anatomical augmented repair may be considered. This study was to assess biomechanical properties of different fixation techniques regarding elongation and ultimate load to failure. METHODS: MCL anatomical augmented repair was simulated by fixation of porcine superficial digital flexor tendon grafts at porcine tibiae. Ten different fixation techniques were assessed. Fixation of the tendon graft was performed using 4.0-mm cancellous screws and either (1) 13.5-mm spiked polyether ketone (PEEK) washers; (2) 14-mm spiked washers; (3) 14-mm suture washers; (4) 14-mm customized washers; (5-8) combination of washers and No. 2 polyester sutures (FiberWire©); or using (9) single or (10) double 5.5-mm titanium suture anchors with No. 2 polyethylene sutures (Ultrabraid®). Biomechanical analysis included pretensioning of the constructs at 20 N for 30 s following cyclic loading of 250 cycles between 20 and 100 N at 1 Hz for measurement of elongation. Additionally, ultimate failure load and failure mode analysis were performed. RESULTS: Spiked PEEK washers secured with polyester sutures (5) yielded best biomechanical properties at time zero for both, elongation during cyclic loading (2.9 ± 0.7 mm) and ultimate failure load (469.8 ± 64.3 N). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that spiked PEEK washers secured with polyester sutures are the most appropriate fixation technique for MCL anatomical augmented repair, thus providing best requirements to allow early knee mobilization and prevent secondary knee laxity.

A novel implant-free tibial pull-press-fixation for ACL reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Extracortical fixation techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction bear the risk of tunnel enlargement, while close-to-aperture fixations often show lower failure loads. The purpose for this study was to investigate the biomechanical benefits of a novel implant-free combination of an extra-cortical and close-to-aperture fixation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Quadrupled human cadaveric semitendinosus tendons were fixed to 30 porcine tibiae with either a cannulated interference screw (I), an implant-free post-fixation (S), or a novel pull-press fixation (P). Specimens were cyclically loaded 20 times between 20 and 60 N followed by 500 cycles with 60-200 N, followed by a load-to-failure test with 1 mm/s. RESULTS: The mean elongation of the tendons in the P-group during the 500 cycles between 60 and 200 N was significantly lower (5.69 ± 2.16 mm) compared to 9.20 ± 3.21 mm in S-group and 9.37 ± 3.1 mm in the I-group (p < 0.05). The mean maximum load-to-failure was significantly higher in the P-group (728.2 ± 76.4 N) compared to 476.4 ± 68.8 N in the S-group and 625.9 ± 82.5 N in the I-group (p < 0.05). Stiffness of the constructs in the P-group was significantly higher (121.7 ± 44.9 N/mm) compared to 46.2 ± 17.7 N/mm in the S- and 72.8 ± 29.8 N/mm in the I-group (p < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates superior biomechanical properties of a novel implant-free tibial pull-press fixation to conventional implant-free and close-to-aperture interference screw fixations in terms of cyclic elongation and maximum load-to-failure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Not applicable, basic science study.

The biomechanics of biodegradable versus titanium interference screw fixation for anterior cruciate ligament augmentation and reconstruction.

PURPOSE: The ligament augmentation and reconstruction system (LARS) is one of the options available for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. To date, however, there are no published data regarding the biomechanical properties of LARS fixation for ACL reconstruction. The aim of this study was to investigate the biomechanical properties of various LARS interference-screw fixations. METHODS: A total of 100 LARS ligaments were fixed in porcine femurs with five different interference screws (four biodegradable screws and one titanium interference screw) introduced from inside-out or extra-articularly outside-in. Each group consisted of ten specimens. The constructs were cyclically stretched and subsequently loaded until failure. We evaluated the maximum load before failure, elongation during cyclic loading, stiffness, and failure mode. RESULTS: Elongation during cyclical loading for all devices tested was significantly larger between the first and 20th cycles than between the 20th and 500th cycles (p < 0.05). Maximum failure load was not significantly lower for the biodegradable screws than for the titanium screws (p > 0.05). All specimens failed because of ligament pull-out from the bony tunnel. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that biomechanical secure fixation of the LARS for ACL reconstruction can be achieved using either biodegradable or titanium interference screws. The stability of fixation is independent of the approach, type of investigation, and type of fixation (extra-articular outside-in or intra-articular inside-out).

Biomechanical properties of suture anchor repair compared with transosseous sutures in patellar tendon ruptures: a cadaveric study.

BACKGROUND: Ruptures of the patellar tendon are debilitating injuries requiring surgical repair. Reliable data about the most appropriate suture technique and suture material are missing. The standard procedure consists of refixing the tendon with sutures in transpatellar tunnels, sometimes combined with augmentation. HYPOTHESIS: Suture anchors provide at least equal results concerning gap formation during cyclic loading and ultimate failure load compared with transosseous suture repair. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 30 human cadaveric patellar tendons underwent tenotomy followed by repair with 5.5-mm titanium suture anchors, 5.5-mm resorbable hydroxyapatite suture anchors, or transpatellar suture tunnels with No. 2 Ultrabraid and the Krackow whipstitch technique. Biomechanical analysis included pretensioning the constructs at 20 N for 30 seconds and then cyclic loading of 250 cycles between 20 and 100 N at 1 Hz in a servohydraulic testing machine with measurement of elongation. After this, ultimate failure load and failure mode analysis was performed. RESULTS: Compared with transosseous sutures, tendon repairs with suture anchors yielded significantly less gap formation during cyclic loading (P < .05) and resisted significantly higher ultimate failure loads (P < .05). Common failure mode was pullout of the eyelet within the suture anchor in the hydroxyapatite anchor group and rupture of the suture in the titanium anchor group and-at lower load to failure-in the transosseous group. CONCLUSION: Patellar tendon repair with suture anchors yields significantly better biomechanical results than repair with the commonly applied transosseous sutures. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings may be of relevance for future clinical treatment of patellar tendon ruptures. Randomized controlled clinical trials comparing suture anchors to transosseous suture repair are desirable.

Biomechanical comparison of different fixation techniques for reconstruction of tibial avulsion fractures of the anterior cruciate ligament.

PURPOSE: The most common fixation techniques for tibial avulsion fractures of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) described in the literature are screw and suture fixation. The fixation of these fractures with the TightRope® device might be an alternative. Up to now it has been commonly used in other injuries, such as acromioclavicular joint or syndesmosis ruptures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of different fixation techniques for the reconstruction of tibial avulsion fractures. METHODS: Type III tibial avulsion fractures were simulated in 40 porcine knees. Each specimen was randomly assigned to one of four groups: (1) anterograde screw fixation, (2) suture fixation, (3) TightRope® fixation or (4) control group. The initial displacement, strength to failure and the failure mode were documented. RESULTS: The maximum load to failure was 1,345 ± 155.5 N for the control group, 402.5 ± 117.6 N for the TightRope® group, 367 ± 115.8 N for the suture group and 311.7 ± 120.3 N for the screw group. The maximum load to failure of the control group was significantly larger compared to all other groups. The initial dislocation was 0.28 ± 0.09 mm for the control group, 0.55 ± 0.26 mm for the TightRope® group, 0.84 ± 0.15 mm for the screw group and 1.14 ± 0.9 mm for the suture group. The initial dislocation was significantly larger for the suture group compared to the TightRope® and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: The TightRope® fixation shows significantly lower initial displacement compared to the suture group. The TightRope® fixation might be an alternative for the repair of ACL tibial avulsion fractures that can be used arthroscopically.