Effectiveness of low-profile supplemental fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with decreased bone mineral density

Tibial tunnel enlargement is affected by the tunnel diameter-screw ratio in tibial hybrid fixation for hamstring ACL reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

There is no evidence on screw diameter with regards to tunnel size in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using hybrid fixation devices. The hypothesis was that an undersized tunnel coverage by the tibial screw leads to subsequent tunnel enlargement in ACLR in hybrid fixation technique.

METHODS

In a retrospective case series, radiographs and clinical scores of 103 patients who underwent primary hamstring tendon ACLR with a hybrid fixation technique at the tibial site (interference screw and suspensory fixation) were obtained. Tunnel diameters in the frontal and sagittal planes were measured on radiographs 6 weeks and 12 months postoperatively. Tunnel enlargement of more than 10% between the two periods was defined as tunnel widening. Tunnel coverage ratio was calculated as the tunnel diameter covered by the screw in percentage.

RESULTS

Overall, tunnel widening 12 months postoperatively was 23.1 ± 17.1% and 24.2 ± 18.2% in the frontal and sagittal plane, respectively. Linear regression analysis revealed the tunnel coverage ratio to be a negative predicting risk factor for tunnel widening (p = 0.001). The ROC curve analysis provided an ideal cut-off for tunnel enlargement of > 10% at a tunnel coverage ratio of 70% (sensitivity 60%, specificity 81%, AUC 75%, p < 0.001). Patients (n = 53/103) with a tunnel coverage ratio of < 70% showed significantly higher tibial tunnel enlargement of 15% in the frontal and sagittal planes. The binary logistic regression showed a significant OR of 6.9 (p = 0.02) for tunnel widening > 10% in the frontal plane if the tunnel coverage ratio was < 70% (sagittal plane: OR 14.7, p = 0.001). Clinical scores did not correlate to tunnel widening.

CONCLUSION

Tibial tunnel widening was affected by the tunnel diameter coverage ratio. To minimize the likelihood of disadvantageous tunnel expansion-which is of importance in case of revision surgery-an interference screw should not undercut the tunnel diameter by more than 1 mm.

Biomechanical comparison of Tibial-sided supplemental fixation techniques in Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of a commercially available suture anchor and a screw post for supplemental tibial fixation of a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) graft at time zero. We hypothesized that supplemental fixation using a suture anchor would demonstrate similar biomechanical performance in comparison with a screw post.

METHODS

Sixteen fresh frozen, healthy human cadaveric knees underwent BTB autograft harvest, placement, and primary tibial-sided interference screw fixation using a standardized technique performed by a single surgeon. Specimens were randomly assigned to one of two tibial-sided supplemental fixation groups (suture anchor or screw post), yielding eight specimens in each group. Each specimen was affixed to a custom loading apparatus, with the tibial tunnel aligned in a vertical position that allowed for parallel "worst-case scenario" loading and eliminated loading variation due to tibial tunnel angle. Grafts were pretensioned to 30 N and biomechanical performance was compared with respect to cyclical loading between 50-250 N for 500 cycles at 0.5 Hz and pull-to-failure loading at 60 mm/min.

RESULTS

The suture anchor and screw post supplemental constructs demonstrated similar performance with respect to all biomechanical parameters assessed, including yield strength (294.0 N [IQR 267.2-304.2 N] versus 332.1 N [IQR 313.8-350.4 N]; P = 0.079) and ultimate strength (330.1 N [IQR 306.9-418.7 N] versus 374.7 N [IQR 362.0-387.3 N]; P = 0.3798). However, of the eight original specimens in each group, one suture anchor specimen (12.5%) and six metallic screw post specimens (75%) failed during cyclical testing and were unable to undergo displacement and load to failure testing.

CONCLUSION

This study provides preliminary evidence that supplemental tibial-sided fixation of a BTB ACL graft with a suture anchor has similar loading characteristics or load-to-failure strength when compared to supplemental fixation with a screw post construct.

STUDY DESIGN

Laboratory Controlled Study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Basic Science Study.

Subcortical Backup Tibial Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Has Similar Maximal Strength to Current Techniques

Purpose

To evaluate the biomechanical profile of subcortical backup fixation (subcortical button [SB]) in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction as compared with a bicortical post and washer (BP) and suture anchor (SA) when used with interference screw (IS) primary fixation and to evaluate the utility of backup fixation for tibial fixation with extramedullary cortical button primary fixation.

Methods

Fifty composite tibias with polyester webbing-simulated graft were used to test constructs across 10 methods. Specimens were separated into the following groups (n = 5): 9-mm IS only, BP (with and without graft and IS), SB (with and without graft and IS), SA (with and without graft and IS), extramedullary suture button (with and without graft and IS), and extramedullary suture button with BP as backup fixation. Specimens were tested under cyclic loading and then loaded to failure. Maximal load at failure, displacement, and stiffness were compared.

Results

Without a graft, the SB and BP had similar maximal loads (802.46 ± 185.18 N vs 785.67 ± 100.96 N, P = .560), and both were stronger than the SA (368.13 ± 77.26 N, P < .001). With graft and an IS, there was no significant difference in maximal load between the BP (1,461.27 ± 173.75 N), SB (1,362.46 ± 80.47 N), and SA (1,334.52 ± 195.80 N). All backup fixation groups were stronger than the control group with IS fixation only (932.91 ± 99.86 N, P < .001). There was no significant difference in outcome measures between the extramedullary suture button groups with and without the BP (failure loads of 721.39 ± 103.32 N and 718.15 ± 108.61 N, respectively).

Conclusions

Subcortical backup fixation in ACL reconstruction has similar biomechanical properties to current methods and is a viable backup fixation alternative. Backup fixation methods work synergistically with IS primary fixation to strengthen the construct. There is no advantage to adding backup fixation to extramedullary button (all-inside) primary fixation when all suture strands are secured to the extramedullary button.

Clinical Relevance

This study provides evidence that subcortical backup fixation is a viable alternative for surgeons during ACL reconstruction.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Soft Tissue Graft Fixation in the Elderly: Is There a Reason to Use Interference Screws? A Human Cadaver Study

PURPOSE

To analyze the ultimate failure load, yield load, stiffness, and cyclic resistance of different anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) soft tissue graft fixation techniques in osteopenic bone.

METHODS

In this study, 24 fresh-frozen human cadaveric tibiae (mean age 82.6 years; range 56-96; 6 male and 6 female donors) were used. Quantitative computed tomography was performed to match bone density. Looped porcine flexor tendon grafts were chosen as ACL graft substitutes for tibial graft fixation techniques (n = 8 each): (1) hybrid fixation with an interference screw and extracortical button fixation; (2) extracortical button fixation; and (3) interference screw fixation. In single cycle mode, constructs were loaded to failure to evaluate stiffness, yield load, and maximum load. In cyclic testing, 2,000 cycles (25-100 N) were applied followed by loading to failure. A 1-way analysis of variance was performed with significance set at P = .05.

RESULTS

Hybrid fixation resulted in significantly higher yield load (283.4 ± 86.19 N; P = .0037) and maximum load (407.9 ± 102.3 N; P = .0026) than interference screw fixation (yield load 176.4 ± 26.03, max load 231.8 ± 94.06 N) in elderly bone. Yield load after extracortical button fixation (252.9 ± 41.97 N; P = .0286) was also higher than that after interference screw fixation, but stiffness (18.98 ± 9.154 N/mm; P = .0041) was less than that after hybrid fixation (37.28 ± 13.53 N/mm). Of 8 specimens in the interference screw group, 7 did not survive 2,000 cycles and failed by graft slippage, whereas all other specimens in both other groups survived.

CONCLUSIONS

Tibial hybrid fixation of ACL soft tissue grafts provides less vertical graft movement than extracortical button fixation and higher primary failure loads than interference screw fixation in elderly bone.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In this elderly human joint in vitro model, tibial hybrid fixation provides biomechanical advantages over other techniques. Graft fixation with only an interference screw should be avoided in osteopenic bone.

Hybrid Tibia Fixation of Soft Tissue Grafts in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Optimal fixation of soft tissue grafts in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains a controversial topic, and tibial-sided fixation is frequently cited as the "weak point" of the femur-graft-tibia construct. Some studies have recommended the use of hybrid fixation (combining intratunnel aperture fixation and extracortical suspensory fixation) on the tibial side to increase the strength of the reconstructed ACL and decrease the risk of graft slippage and subsequent failure. However, no consensus has emerged on the necessity or suitability of this technique, relative to single modes of fixation.

PURPOSE

This study sought answers to the following questions: (1) Does hybrid fixation result in stronger, stiffer initial fixation of soft tissue grafts? (2) Does hybrid fixation reduce side-to-side laxity differences in clinical practice? (3) Does hybrid fixation increase complication rates when compared with a single mode of tibial fixation?

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic keyword search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, and the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews was performed. Candidate articles were included if they compared biomechanical or clinical characteristics of tibial-sided hybrid fixation (defined as a combination of aperture and suspensory fixation methods) with single-mode fixation of soft tissue grafts in ACL reconstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies (15 biomechanical, 6 clinical) met criteria for inclusion. Most biomechanical studies reported significantly increased strength and stiffness with hybrid fixation versus single modes of fixation. Among clinical studies, 66% reported significantly decreased anterior-posterior laxity when hybrid fixation methods were employed, with the remainder showing no difference.

CONCLUSION

Hybrid methods of tibial-sided graft fixation in ACL reconstruction result in stronger initial fixation and less side-to-side laxity after healing but do not change patient-reported outcomes at 1- to 3-year follow-up.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews No. 42014015464.

Numerical Methodology to Evaluate the Effects of Bone Density and Cement Augmentation on Fixation Stiffness of Bone-Anchoring Devices

Bone quality is one of the reported factors influencing the success of bone anchors in arthroscopic repairs of torn rotator cuffs at the shoulder. This work was aimed at developing refined numerical methods to investigate how bone quality can influence the fixation stiffness of bone anchors. To do that bone biopsies were scanned at 26-μm resolution with a high-resolution microcomputer tomography (micro-CT) scanner and their images were processed for virtual implantation of a typical design of bone anchor. These were converted to microfinite element (μFE) and homogenized classical FE models, and analyses were performed to simulate pulling on the bone anchor with and without cement augmentation. Quantification of structural stiffness for each implanted specimen was then computed, as well as stress distributions within the bone structures, and related to the bone volume fraction of the specimens. Results show that the classical method is excellently correlated to structural predictions of the more refined μFE method, despite the qualitative differences in local stresses in the bone surrounding the implant. Predictions from additional loading cases suggest that structural fixation stiffness in various directions is related to apparent bone density of the surrounding bone. Augmentation of anchoring with bone cement stiffens the fixation and alters these relations. This work showed the usability of homogenized FE (hFE) in the evaluation of bone anchor fixation and will be used to develop new methodologies for virtual investigations leading to optimized repairs of rotator cuff and glenoid Bankart lesions.

Use of carbon-fiber-reinforced composite implants in orthopedic surgery

Carbon-fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone implants offer several benefits over traditional metal implants. Their radiolucent property permits improved, artifact-free radiographic imaging. Their lower modulus of elasticity better matches that of bone. Their fatigue strength is greater than most metal implants. This article reviews the use of these implants in orthopedic surgery, including treatment of conditions involving the spine, trauma, tumor, and infection.