The Effect of Supplementary Staple Fixation on Biomechanical Properties of Soft Tissue Graft Tibial Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

This study aimed to test and compare the biomechanical properties of three tibial fixation methods of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tendon grafts under cyclic load and load-to-failure testing in the bovine proximal tibiae, comprising (1) staple fixation alone, (2) interference screw fixation alone, and (3) interference screw fixation with a supplementary staple. Twenty-four bovine tibiae used in the study were divided into three groups (eight proximal tibiae in each group) based on tibial fixation methods of ACL tendon grafts: group A (a spiked ligament staple alone), group B (a cannulated interference screw alone), and group C (a cannulated interference screw with a supplementary staple). Each graft fixation was exposed to cyclic loading conditions. Significant differences were determined in failure load among the three groups (p = 0.008). The mean failure load was significantly higher in group B (717.04 ± 218.51 N) than in group A (308.03 ± 17.22 N) (p = 0.006). No significant differences were observed among the groups regarding axial stiffness (p = 0.442). Cyclic displacement differed significantly among the three groups (p = 0.005). In pairwise comparisons, the mean cyclic displacement was significantly higher in group A (8.22 ± 3.24 mm) compared with group C (1.49 ± 0.41 mm) (p = 0.005). Failure displacement varied considerably among the groups (p = 0.037). Although group B (15.53 ± 6.43 mm) exhibited a greater mean failure displacement than both group A (4.9 ± 0.75 mm) and group C (8.84 ± 4.65 mm), these differences did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.602 and p = 0.329, respectively). Interference screw fixation alone and supplementary staple fixation have biomechanically similar characteristics in terms of initial strength and stiffness of tibial ACL soft tissue graft fixation. Regardless of staple use, an interference screw with the same diameter as the tibial tunnel can ensure sufficient tensile strength in tibial ACL graft fixation.

Biomechanical comparison of distal femoral fracture fixation: Polyaxial vs. uniaxial locking screws with different blocking screw configurations in retrograde femoral nailing.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical studies have indicated reduced reliance on blocking screws with the introduction of polyaxial locking nails, yet the biomechanical superiority of polyaxial locking over blocking screws remains unverified, specifically for distal dia-metaphyseal femur fractures. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that the combination of multiaxial locking using three screws and parallel locking reinforced by two blocking screws would result in superior outcomes compared to utilizing only parallel locking with two screws and one blocking screw. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Third-generation custom-made femur models representing AO/OTA 32 A1.2 dia-metaphyseal comminuted oblique fractures were divided into four groups (n=10/group). Group A employed distal fixation with three 4.5-mm polyaxial screws. Group B used two parallel locking screws and two blocking screws, Group C used two parallel locking screws and one blocking screw, and Group D used only two parallel screws. Specimens underwent axial and torsional load testing to assess fatigue strength, ultimate strength, axial stiffness (N/mm), torsional stiffness (N/mm/deg), axial load to failure (N), torsional load to failure (N/mm), coronal and sagittal angulations, and fracture site collapse. RESULTS: Group C exhibited statistically superior torsional stiffness compared to Groups B and D (p=0.039 and p=0.034, respectively). Axial load to failure was highest in Group B and lowest in Group D (p=0.032). Group C demonstrated the highest torsional strength, while Group B exhibited the lowest (p=0.006). Coronal displacement was greatest in Group B, while Group A showed the highest resistance (p=0.009). Group A demonstrated the greatest resistance to fracture site collapse, with the weakest specimens observed in Groups B and C (p=0.01). DISCUSSION: The performance of a single laterally positioned blocking screw is comparable to using two blocking screws. Medial positioning of a second blocking screw is unnecessary for stability enhancement. Multiaxial locking prevents fracture site collapse and coronal plane angulation more effectively than other methods. Multiaxial locking and/or parallel screws with a single laterally positioned blocking screw provide superior stiffness and stability for treating unstable dia-metaphyseal distal femoral fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

Biomechanical Comparison of Uniplanar versus Biplanar Lateral Opening-wedge Distal Femoral Osteotomy Techniques in Terms of Risk for Medial Hinge Fracture.

The effect of osteotomy type on the initial stiffness of the bone-implant construct in lateral opening-wedge distal femoral osteotomy (LOWDFO) using a uniplanar compared with a biplanar technique has been investigated. However, no study has explored the biomechanical risk factors for medial hinge fracture. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical strength of uniplanar versus biplanar LOWDFO regarding the risk for medial hinge fracture during gap opening. Twelve composite femora were divided into two groups (six in each group) based on the distal femoral osteotomy technique: uniplanar versus biplanar LOWDFO. All LOWDFO models were subjected to incremental static loading. The gap distance was expanded by 1 mm, and displacement values were recorded as anterior and posterior gap distances (mm). The average force values of all samples at certain gap distances were recorded, and the head distance was measured. The uniplanar group had higher load values than the biplanar group at all anterior gap distances. These differences were only significant at 2- and 3-mm gap distances (p = 0.025 and 0.037). At all posterior gap distances, the uniplanar group had higher load values than the biplanar group, but these differences only reached statistical significance at 2 mm (p = 0.037). Both groups had similar anterior, posterior, and average gap distances (p = 0.75, 0.522, 0.873). The uniplanar group had a higher head insertion distance (15.3 ± 5.7) than the biplanar group (14.7 ± 2.9), but it was not significant (p = 0.87). The uniplanar group had a lower average load before medial hinge fracture (46.41 ± 13.91 N) than the biplanar group (54.92 ± 31.94, p = 0.81). The biplanar group had an average maximum load value of 64.18 ± 25.6 N, while the uniplanar group had 57.90 ± 12.21 N (p = 0.81). This study revealed that the biplanar osteotomy technique allows a wider opening wedge gap with less risk of a medial hinge fracture than uniplanar LOWDFO.Level of evidence was level 3, case-control series.