Does thread shape affect the fixation strength of the bioabsorbable interference screws for anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions? A biomechanical study

Biomechanical Stability of Third-Generation Adjustable Suture Loop Devices Versus Continuous Loop Button Device for Cortical Fixation of ACL Tendon Grafts

Background

Concerns regarding the primary stability of early adjustable loop button (ALB) devices for cortical fixation of tendon grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) have led to the development of new implant designs.

Purpose

To evaluate biomechanical stability of recent ALB implants in comparison with a continuous loop button (CLB) device.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

ACLR was performed in a porcine model (n = 40) using 2-strand porcine flexor tendons with a diameter of 8 mm. Three ALB devices (Infinity Button [ALB1 group]; Tightrope II RT [ALB2 group]; A-TACK [ALB3 group]) and 1 CLB device (FlippTack with polyethylene suture) were used for cortical tendon graft fixation. Cyclic loading (1000 cycles up to 250 N) with complete unloading were applied to the free end of the tendon graft using a uniaxial testing machine, followed by load to failure. Elongation, stiffness, yield load, and ultimate failure load were recorded and compared between the groups using a Kruskal-Wallis test with post hoc Dunn correction.

Results

Elongation after 1000 cycles at 250 N was similar between groups (ALB1, 4.5 ± 0.7 mm; ALB2, 4.8 ± 0.8 mm; ALB3, 4.5 ± 0.6 mm; CLB, 4.5 ± 0.8 mm), as was load to failure (ALB1, 838 ± 109 N; ALB2, 930 ± 89 N; ALB3, 809 ± 103 N; CLB, 842 ± 80 N). Stiffness was significantly higher in the ALB1 group compared with the CLB group (262.3 ± 21.6 vs 229.3 ± 15.1 N/mm; P < .05). No significant difference was found between the 4 groups regarding yield load. Constructs failed either by rupture of the loop, breakage of the button, or rupture of the tendon.

Conclusion

The tested third-generation ALB devices for cortical fixation in ACLR withstood cyclic loading with complete unloading without significant differences to a CLB device.

Clinical Relevance

The third-generation ALB devices tested in the present study provided biomechanical stability comparable with that of a CLB device. Furthermore, ultimate failure loads of all tested implants exceeded the loads expected to occur in the postoperative period after ACLR.

Interference screws manufactured from magnesium display similar primary stability for soft tissue anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation compared to a biocomposite material - a biomechanical study

PURPOSE

Biodegradable interference screws (IFS) can be manufactured from different biomaterials. Magnesium was previously shown to possess osteoinductive properties, making it a promising material to promote graft-bone healing in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The purpose of this study was to compare IFS made from magnesium to a contemporary biocomposite IFS.

METHODS

In a porcine model of ACL reconstruction, deep porcine flexor tendons were trimmed to a diameter of 8 mm, sutured in Krackow technique, and fixed with either 8 × 30 mm biocomposite IFS (Bc-IFS) or 8 × 30 mm magnesium IFS (Mg-IFS) in an 8 mm diameter bone tunnel in porcine tibiae. Cyclic loading for 1000 cycles from 0 to 250 N was applied, followed by load to failure testing. Elongation, load to failure and stiffness of the tested constructs was determined.

RESULTS

After 1000 cycles at 250 N, elongation was 4.8 mm ± 1.5 in the Bc-IFS group, and 4.9 mm ± 1.5 in the Mg-IFS group. Load to failure was 649.5 N ± 174.3 in the Bc-IFS group, and 683.8 N ± 116.5 in the Mg-IFS group. Stiffness was 125.3 N/mm ± 21.9 in the Bc-IFS group, and 122.5 N/mm ± 20.3 in the Mg-IFS group. No significant differences regarding elongation, load to failure and stiffness between Bc-IFS and Mg-IFS were observed.

CONCLUSION

Magnesium IFS show comparable biomechanical primary stability in comparison to biocomposite IFS and may therefore be an alternative to contemporary biodegradable IFS.

Comparison of biomechanical analysis of four different tibial tunnel fixations in a bovine model

BACKGROUND

To determine the ideal fixation technique for an ACL reconstruction with a hamstring graft, multiple studies have been undertaken to define the initial biomechanical properties of tibial fixation.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of tibial fixation methods by creating single or hybrid systems.

METHODS

Bovine tibias and forefoot digital extensor tendons were prepared with four different tibial anterior cruciate ligament fixation methods and compared biomechanically. Fixation materials included polyethylene Ultrabraid high-strength sutures, Biosure interference screws (Smith and Nephew, Memphis, TN, USA), staples (Smith and Nephew, Richards Regular Fixation Staples without Spikes, Memphis, TN, USA), and knotless suture anchors (Multifix-S PEEK) (Smith and Nephew, Memphis, TN, USA). Four groups (n = 5 specimens) were established - group I: single fixation with interference screws; group II: single fixation with knotless anchors; group III: hybrid fixation with interference screws and staples; group IV: hybrid fixation with interference screws and knotless anchors. Each specimen underwent evaluations for cyclic displacement, cyclic stiffness, initial loading strength, ultimate failure load, pull-out displacement, and pull-out stiffness.

RESULTS

All specimens completed cyclic loading and load-to-failure. The cyclic displacement in group II, which had a single fixation, indicated significantly greater elongation compared with the other groups (P = 0.002). The hybrid systems were more rigid than the single systems in terms of cyclic stiffness, and no statistically significant difference was observed between the hybrid systems (P = 0.461). Group IV was significantly superior in terms of the ultimate failure load (P = 0.004). No statistically significant differences were noted between the groups for pull-out displacement or pull-out stiffness.

CONCLUSION

Single fixation with bioscrews as an in-tunnel tibia fixation method was as successful as hybrid systems. Multifix-S PEEK knotless suture anchors, which can be combined with bioscrews, can be a superior fixation alternative due to its flexibility and ultimate failure load values.