Cargando…
Anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model
BACKGROUND: With the developments in the arthroscopic technique, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) remnant-preserving reconstruction is gradually gaining attention with respect to improving proprioception and enhancing early revascularization of the graft. To evaluate the mechanical pull-out strength...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7860227/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33536007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-03955-w |
_version_ | 1783646898197889024 |
---|---|
author | Ryu, Dong Jin Kwon, Kyeu Back Hong, Da Hee Park, Sang Jun Park, Jae Sung Wang, Joon Ho |
author_facet | Ryu, Dong Jin Kwon, Kyeu Back Hong, Da Hee Park, Sang Jun Park, Jae Sung Wang, Joon Ho |
author_sort | Ryu, Dong Jin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: With the developments in the arthroscopic technique, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) remnant-preserving reconstruction is gradually gaining attention with respect to improving proprioception and enhancing early revascularization of the graft. To evaluate the mechanical pull-out strength of three different methods for remnant-preserving and re-tensioning reconstruction during ACL reconstruction. METHODS: Twenty-seven fresh knees from mature pigs were used in this study. Each knee was dissected to isolate the femoral attachment of ACL and cut the attachment. An MTS tensile testing machine with dual-screw fixation clamp with 30° flexion angle was used. The 27 specimens were tested after applying re-tensioning sutures with No. 0 polydioxanone (PDS), using the single stitch (n = 9), loop stitch (n = 9), and triple stitch (n = 9) methods. We measured the mode of failure, defined as (1) ligament failure (longitudinal splitting of the remnant ACL) or (2) suture failure (tearing of the PDS stitch); load-to-failure strength; and stiffness for the three methods. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare the variance of load-to-failure strength and stiffness among the three groups. RESULTS: Ligament failure occurred in all cases in the single stitch group and in all but one case in the triple stitch group. Suture failure occurred in all cases in the loop stitch group and in one case in the triple stitch group. The load-to-failure strength was significantly higher with loop stich (91.52 ± 8.19 N) and triple stitch (111.1 ± 18.15 N) than with single stitch (43.79 ± 11.54 N) (p = 0.002). With respect to stiffness, triple stitch (2.50 ± 0.37 N/mm) yielded significantly higher stiffness than the other methods (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that loop stitch or triple stitch would be a better option for increasing the mechanical strength when applying remnant-preserving and re-tensioning reconstruction during ACL reconstruction. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7860227 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78602272021-02-05 Anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model Ryu, Dong Jin Kwon, Kyeu Back Hong, Da Hee Park, Sang Jun Park, Jae Sung Wang, Joon Ho BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: With the developments in the arthroscopic technique, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) remnant-preserving reconstruction is gradually gaining attention with respect to improving proprioception and enhancing early revascularization of the graft. To evaluate the mechanical pull-out strength of three different methods for remnant-preserving and re-tensioning reconstruction during ACL reconstruction. METHODS: Twenty-seven fresh knees from mature pigs were used in this study. Each knee was dissected to isolate the femoral attachment of ACL and cut the attachment. An MTS tensile testing machine with dual-screw fixation clamp with 30° flexion angle was used. The 27 specimens were tested after applying re-tensioning sutures with No. 0 polydioxanone (PDS), using the single stitch (n = 9), loop stitch (n = 9), and triple stitch (n = 9) methods. We measured the mode of failure, defined as (1) ligament failure (longitudinal splitting of the remnant ACL) or (2) suture failure (tearing of the PDS stitch); load-to-failure strength; and stiffness for the three methods. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare the variance of load-to-failure strength and stiffness among the three groups. RESULTS: Ligament failure occurred in all cases in the single stitch group and in all but one case in the triple stitch group. Suture failure occurred in all cases in the loop stitch group and in one case in the triple stitch group. The load-to-failure strength was significantly higher with loop stich (91.52 ± 8.19 N) and triple stitch (111.1 ± 18.15 N) than with single stitch (43.79 ± 11.54 N) (p = 0.002). With respect to stiffness, triple stitch (2.50 ± 0.37 N/mm) yielded significantly higher stiffness than the other methods (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that loop stitch or triple stitch would be a better option for increasing the mechanical strength when applying remnant-preserving and re-tensioning reconstruction during ACL reconstruction. BioMed Central 2021-02-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7860227/ /pubmed/33536007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-03955-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Ryu, Dong Jin Kwon, Kyeu Back Hong, Da Hee Park, Sang Jun Park, Jae Sung Wang, Joon Ho Anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model |
title | Anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model |
title_full | Anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model |
title_fullStr | Anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model |
title_full_unstemmed | Anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model |
title_short | Anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model |
title_sort | anterior cruciate ligament remnant‐preserving and re‐tensioning reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison study of three different re‐tensioning methods in a porcine model |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7860227/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33536007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-03955-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ryudongjin anteriorcruciateligamentremnantpreservingandretensioningreconstructionabiomechanicalcomparisonstudyofthreedifferentretensioningmethodsinaporcinemodel AT kwonkyeuback anteriorcruciateligamentremnantpreservingandretensioningreconstructionabiomechanicalcomparisonstudyofthreedifferentretensioningmethodsinaporcinemodel AT hongdahee anteriorcruciateligamentremnantpreservingandretensioningreconstructionabiomechanicalcomparisonstudyofthreedifferentretensioningmethodsinaporcinemodel AT parksangjun anteriorcruciateligamentremnantpreservingandretensioningreconstructionabiomechanicalcomparisonstudyofthreedifferentretensioningmethodsinaporcinemodel AT parkjaesung anteriorcruciateligamentremnantpreservingandretensioningreconstructionabiomechanicalcomparisonstudyofthreedifferentretensioningmethodsinaporcinemodel AT wangjoonho anteriorcruciateligamentremnantpreservingandretensioningreconstructionabiomechanicalcomparisonstudyofthreedifferentretensioningmethodsinaporcinemodel |