Cargando…

Biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE: Double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction may offer kinematic restoration superior to anatomic single bundle (SB), but it remains technically challenging. The femoral attachment site has the most effect on ACL graft isometry, so a simplified three-socket (3S) constr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lord, Breck R., El-Daou, Hadi, Sabnis, Bhushan M., Gupte, Chinmay M., Wilson, Adrian M., Amis, Andrew A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5331106/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27637854
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4316-6
_version_ 1782511312685760512
author Lord, Breck R.
El-Daou, Hadi
Sabnis, Bhushan M.
Gupte, Chinmay M.
Wilson, Adrian M.
Amis, Andrew A.
author_facet Lord, Breck R.
El-Daou, Hadi
Sabnis, Bhushan M.
Gupte, Chinmay M.
Wilson, Adrian M.
Amis, Andrew A.
author_sort Lord, Breck R.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction may offer kinematic restoration superior to anatomic single bundle (SB), but it remains technically challenging. The femoral attachment site has the most effect on ACL graft isometry, so a simplified three-socket (3S) construct which still uses two sockets to cover the femoral ACL attachment is attractive. It was hypothesised that ACL reconstruction using three- and four-socket techniques would more closely restore native knee kinematics compared to anatomic two-socket (SB) surgery. METHODS: Nine cadaveric knees were used to evaluate the kinematics of ACL-intact, ACL-deficient, anatomic SB, three-socket, and DB arthroscopic ACL reconstructions. Suspensory fixation was used, and grafts were tensioned to match the anterior draw of the intact knee at 20°. A six-degree-of-freedom robotic system measured knee laxity under 90 N anterior tibial force and rotational laxity under 5 N-m torque. Combined moments were applied to simulate the pivot-shift subluxation: 4 N-m internal rotation and 8 N-m valgus. RESULTS: Significant differences between reconstructions were not found during anterior tibial loading, apart from SB being more lax than DB at 60° flexion. All reconstructions produced comparable laxity to the intact state, apart from SB at 60°. Significant differences between reconstructions were not found at any flexion angle during tibial internal/external applied torques. Under combined loading, DB produced significantly less laxity than SB constructs apart from anterior tibial translation at 0° and internal rotation at 45°. 3S and DB were comparable to the native knee throughout. CONCLUSION: Although 3S restored laxities to a similar extent to DB, significant superiority over SB surgery was not observed. Although statistically significant differences were found between SB and DB surgery during anterior tibial and simulated pivot-shift loading, both remained similar to the native knee. The clinical relevance is that this study did not support an ACL graft construct more complex than an anatomic single bundle.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5331106
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53311062017-03-14 Biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Lord, Breck R. El-Daou, Hadi Sabnis, Bhushan M. Gupte, Chinmay M. Wilson, Adrian M. Amis, Andrew A. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Knee PURPOSE: Double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction may offer kinematic restoration superior to anatomic single bundle (SB), but it remains technically challenging. The femoral attachment site has the most effect on ACL graft isometry, so a simplified three-socket (3S) construct which still uses two sockets to cover the femoral ACL attachment is attractive. It was hypothesised that ACL reconstruction using three- and four-socket techniques would more closely restore native knee kinematics compared to anatomic two-socket (SB) surgery. METHODS: Nine cadaveric knees were used to evaluate the kinematics of ACL-intact, ACL-deficient, anatomic SB, three-socket, and DB arthroscopic ACL reconstructions. Suspensory fixation was used, and grafts were tensioned to match the anterior draw of the intact knee at 20°. A six-degree-of-freedom robotic system measured knee laxity under 90 N anterior tibial force and rotational laxity under 5 N-m torque. Combined moments were applied to simulate the pivot-shift subluxation: 4 N-m internal rotation and 8 N-m valgus. RESULTS: Significant differences between reconstructions were not found during anterior tibial loading, apart from SB being more lax than DB at 60° flexion. All reconstructions produced comparable laxity to the intact state, apart from SB at 60°. Significant differences between reconstructions were not found at any flexion angle during tibial internal/external applied torques. Under combined loading, DB produced significantly less laxity than SB constructs apart from anterior tibial translation at 0° and internal rotation at 45°. 3S and DB were comparable to the native knee throughout. CONCLUSION: Although 3S restored laxities to a similar extent to DB, significant superiority over SB surgery was not observed. Although statistically significant differences were found between SB and DB surgery during anterior tibial and simulated pivot-shift loading, both remained similar to the native knee. The clinical relevance is that this study did not support an ACL graft construct more complex than an anatomic single bundle. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016-09-16 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5331106/ /pubmed/27637854 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4316-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Knee
Lord, Breck R.
El-Daou, Hadi
Sabnis, Bhushan M.
Gupte, Chinmay M.
Wilson, Adrian M.
Amis, Andrew A.
Biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
title Biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
title_full Biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
title_fullStr Biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
title_short Biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
title_sort biomechanical comparison of graft structures in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
topic Knee
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5331106/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27637854
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4316-6
work_keys_str_mv AT lordbreckr biomechanicalcomparisonofgraftstructuresinanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction
AT eldaouhadi biomechanicalcomparisonofgraftstructuresinanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction
AT sabnisbhushanm biomechanicalcomparisonofgraftstructuresinanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction
AT guptechinmaym biomechanicalcomparisonofgraftstructuresinanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction
AT wilsonadrianm biomechanicalcomparisonofgraftstructuresinanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction
AT amisandrewa biomechanicalcomparisonofgraftstructuresinanteriorcruciateligamentreconstruction