Cargando…

Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies

BACKGROUND: Fixed- and adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension devices are commonly used for femoral graft fixation during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). PURPOSE: To compare the biomechanical results of fixed- versus adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension devices in studi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Houck, Darby A., Kraeutler, Matthew J., McCarty, Eric C., Bravman, Jonathan T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6196635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30364394
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967118801762
_version_ 1783364593849991168
author Houck, Darby A.
Kraeutler, Matthew J.
McCarty, Eric C.
Bravman, Jonathan T.
author_facet Houck, Darby A.
Kraeutler, Matthew J.
McCarty, Eric C.
Bravman, Jonathan T.
author_sort Houck, Darby A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Fixed- and adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension devices are commonly used for femoral graft fixation during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). PURPOSE: To compare the biomechanical results of fixed- versus adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension devices in studies simulating ACLR with an isolated device and/or specimen setup using porcine femora and bovine flexor tendons. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases to find studies comparing the biomechanical strength of fixed- and adjustable-loop cortical suspension devices for ACLR with isolated device and/or specimen setups using porcine femora and bovine flexor tendons. Studies that compared both devices with similar biomechanical methods were included. Data extracted included displacement during cyclic loading, ultimate load to failure, and mode of failure of the different cortical suspension devices for ACLR. RESULTS: Six studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 76 fixed-loop devices and 120 adjustable-loop devices. Load to failure was significantly different (P < .0001), with the strongest fixation device being the ToggleLoc with ZipLoop adjustable-loop device (1443.9 ± 512.3 N), compared with the Endobutton CL fixed-loop device (1312.9 ± 258.1 N; P = .04) and the TightRope RT adjustable-loop device (863.8 ± 64.7 N; P = .01). Cyclic displacement was significantly different, with Endobutton CL (3.7 ± 3.9 mm) showing the least displacement, followed by ToggleLoc with ZipLoop (4.9 ± 2.3 mm) and TightRope RT (7.7 ± 11.1 mm) (P < .0001). Mode of failure was statistically different between the 3 groups (P = .01), with suture failure accounting for 83.8% of TightRope RT devices, 69.4% of ToggleLoc with ZipLoop devices, and 60.3% of Endobutton CL devices. CONCLUSION: Current biomechanical data suggest that the ToggleLoc with ZipLoop device is the strongest fixation device at “time zero” in terms of ultimate load to mechanical failure. However, the Endobutton CL device demonstrated the least cyclic displacement, which may be a more clinically applicable measure of device superiority.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6196635
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61966352018-10-24 Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies Houck, Darby A. Kraeutler, Matthew J. McCarty, Eric C. Bravman, Jonathan T. Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Fixed- and adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension devices are commonly used for femoral graft fixation during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). PURPOSE: To compare the biomechanical results of fixed- versus adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension devices in studies simulating ACLR with an isolated device and/or specimen setup using porcine femora and bovine flexor tendons. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases to find studies comparing the biomechanical strength of fixed- and adjustable-loop cortical suspension devices for ACLR with isolated device and/or specimen setups using porcine femora and bovine flexor tendons. Studies that compared both devices with similar biomechanical methods were included. Data extracted included displacement during cyclic loading, ultimate load to failure, and mode of failure of the different cortical suspension devices for ACLR. RESULTS: Six studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 76 fixed-loop devices and 120 adjustable-loop devices. Load to failure was significantly different (P < .0001), with the strongest fixation device being the ToggleLoc with ZipLoop adjustable-loop device (1443.9 ± 512.3 N), compared with the Endobutton CL fixed-loop device (1312.9 ± 258.1 N; P = .04) and the TightRope RT adjustable-loop device (863.8 ± 64.7 N; P = .01). Cyclic displacement was significantly different, with Endobutton CL (3.7 ± 3.9 mm) showing the least displacement, followed by ToggleLoc with ZipLoop (4.9 ± 2.3 mm) and TightRope RT (7.7 ± 11.1 mm) (P < .0001). Mode of failure was statistically different between the 3 groups (P = .01), with suture failure accounting for 83.8% of TightRope RT devices, 69.4% of ToggleLoc with ZipLoop devices, and 60.3% of Endobutton CL devices. CONCLUSION: Current biomechanical data suggest that the ToggleLoc with ZipLoop device is the strongest fixation device at “time zero” in terms of ultimate load to mechanical failure. However, the Endobutton CL device demonstrated the least cyclic displacement, which may be a more clinically applicable measure of device superiority. SAGE Publications 2018-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6196635/ /pubmed/30364394 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967118801762 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Houck, Darby A.
Kraeutler, Matthew J.
McCarty, Eric C.
Bravman, Jonathan T.
Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies
title Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies
title_full Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies
title_fullStr Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies
title_full_unstemmed Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies
title_short Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies
title_sort fixed- versus adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of biomechanical studies
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6196635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30364394
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967118801762
work_keys_str_mv AT houckdarbya fixedversusadjustableloopfemoralcorticalsuspensiondevicesforanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofbiomechanicalstudies
AT kraeutlermatthewj fixedversusadjustableloopfemoralcorticalsuspensiondevicesforanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofbiomechanicalstudies
AT mccartyericc fixedversusadjustableloopfemoralcorticalsuspensiondevicesforanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofbiomechanicalstudies
AT bravmanjonathant fixedversusadjustableloopfemoralcorticalsuspensiondevicesforanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofbiomechanicalstudies