Mechanical evaluation of two crimp clamp systems for extracapsular stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament-deficient canine stifle.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the mechanical properties and interoperator variabilities of 2 crimp clamp systems for extracapsular, fabello-tibial, nylon loop stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle in dogs. STUDY DESIGN: In vitro mechanical testing. METHODS: Three operators with different grip strengths each secured 20 standardized nylon loops using stainless-steel crimp clamps: 10 using a Veterinary Instrumentation system (45 kg [100 lb] test nylon leader line, 12 mm crimp clamps) and 10 using a Securos system (36 kg [80 lb] test nylon leader line, 36 kg [80 lb] crimp clamps). Loops were tensile loaded to failure in a materials testing machine. RESULTS: Mean ultimate load and mean stiffness were significantly higher for the Securos (336.9 N, 60.6 N/mm) than for the Veterinary Instrumentation system (113.8 N, 37.0 N/mm). For both systems, ultimate load was subject to interoperator variability. CONCLUSIONS: The Securos loops were significantly stronger and stiffer than the Veterinary Instrumentation loops for all operators, but significant differences between operators for ultimate load existed for both systems. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Securos fabello-tibial sutures will withstand greater loads than Veterinary Instrumentation sutures and this is particularly true for sutures created by surgeons with reduced grip strength. It may be necessary to use more than 1 Veterinary Instrumentation suture to match the ultimate load and stiffness of a Securos suture.

Mechanical evaluation of two loop tensioning methods for crimp clamp extracapsular stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament-deficient canine stifle.

OBJECTIVES: To describe a method of tightening nylon loops secured with a crimping system for extracapsular fabello-tibial stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle and to compare this with a method using a commercially available tensioning device. STUDY DESIGN: In vitro mechanical testing. METHODS: Fourteen standardized nylon loops were tensioned using a tensioning device and secured with crimp clamps. Another 14 loops were tightened by partially securing the crimp clamp, followed by tightening of the loop by hand, before definitively securing the crimp clamp. Loops were loaded to failure in a materials testing machine. RESULTS: Mean ultimate loads for instrument-tightened and hand-tightened loops were 383.7 and 371.4 N, respectively. Mean stiffness values for instrument-tightened and hand-tightened loops were 59.7 and 59.3 N/mm, respectively. These differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The hand tightening method does not affect the mechanical properties of the loop. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The hand tightening method described is a valuable technique for unassisted surgeons without access to tensioning devices.