Biomechanical Comparison of Anterior Cervical Plate Fixation Versus Integrated Fixation Cage for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Cadaveric, biomechanic study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the range of motion profiles of the cervical spine following one-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) constructs instrumented with either an interbody cage and anterior plate or integrated fixation cage in a cadaveric model. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: While anterior plates with interbody cages are the most common construct of fixation in ACDF, newer integrated cage-plate devices seek to provide similar stability with a decreased implant profile. However, differences in postoperative cervical range of motion between the 2 constructs remain unclear. METHODS: Six cadaveric spines were segmented into 2 functional spine units (FSUs): C2-C5 and C6-T2. Each FSU was nondestructively bent in flexion-extension (FE), right-left lateral bending (LB), and right-left axial rotation (AR) at a rate of 0.5°/s under a constant axial load until a limit of 2-Nm was reached to evaluate baseline range of motion (ROM). Matched pairs were then randomly assigned to undergo instrumentation with either the standard anterior cage and plate (CP) or the integrated fixation cage (IF). Following instrumentation, ROM was then remeasured as previously described. RESULTS: For CP fixation, ROM increased by 61.2±31.7% for FE, 36.3±20.4% for LB, and 31.7±19.1% for AR. For IF fixation, ROM increased by 64.2±15.5% for FE, 56.7±39.8% for LB, and 94.5±65.1% for AR. There was no significant difference in motion between each group across FE, LB, and AR. CONCLUSION: This biomechanical study demonstrated increased motion in both the CP and IF groups relative to the intact, un-instrumented state. However, our model showed no differences in ROM between CP and IF constructs in any direction of motion. These results suggest that either method of instrumentation is a suitable option for ACDF with respect to constructing stiffness at time zero.

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.

Hooks Versus Pedicle Screws at the Upper Instrumented Level: An In Vitro Biomechanical Comparison.

STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare motions at the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) and supra-adjacent level (UIV+1) between two fixation techniques in thoracic posterior spinal fusion constructs. We hypothesized there would be greater motion at UIV+1 after cyclic loading across all constructs and bilateral pedicle screws (BPSs) with posterior ligamentous compromise would demonstrate the greatest UIV+1 range of motion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Proximal junctional kyphosis is a well-recognized complication following long thoracolumbar posterior spinal fusion, however, its mechanism is poorly understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven thoracic functional spine units were randomly divided into three UIV fixation groups (n=9): (1) BPS, (2) bilateral transverse process hooks (TPHs), and (3) BPS with compromise of the posterior elements between UIV and UIV+1 (BPS-C). Specimens were tested on a servohydraulic materials testing system in native state, following instrumentation, and after cyclic loading. functional spine units were loaded in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending, and axial rotation. RESULTS: After cyclic testing, the TPH group had a mean 29.4% increase in FE range of motion at UIV+1 versus 76.6% in the BPS group ( P <0.05). The BPS-C group showed an increased FE of 49.9% and 62.19% with sectioning of the facet joints and interspinous ligament respectively prior to cyclic testing. CONCLUSION: BPSs at the UIV led to greater motion at UIV+1 compared to bilateral TPH after cyclic loading. This is likely due to the increased rigidity of BPS compared to TPH leading to a "softer" transition between the TPH construct and native anatomy at the supra-adjacent level. Facet capsule compromise led to a 49.9% increase in UIV+1 motion, underscoring the importance of preserving the posterior ligamentous complex. Clinical studies that account for fusion rates are warranted to determine if constructs with a "soft transition" result in less proximal junctional kyphosis in vivo .

Biomechanical Analysis of Multilevel Posterior Cervical Spinal Fusion Constructs.

STUDY DESIGN: Controlled Laboratory Study. OBJECTIVE: To compare multilevel posterior cervical fusion (PCF) constructs stopping at C7, T1, and T2 under cyclic load to determine the range of motion (ROM) between the lowest instrumented level and lowest instrumented-adjacent level (LIV-1). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PCF is a mainstay of treatment for various cervical spine conditions. The transition between the flexible cervical spine and rigid thoracic spine can lead to construct failure at the cervicothoracic junction. There is little evidence to determine the most appropriate level at which to stop a multilevel PCF. METHODS: Fifteen human cadaveric cervicothoracic spines were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: PCF stopping at C7, T1, or T2. Specimens were tested in their native state, following a simulated PCF, and after cyclic loading. Specimens were loaded in flexion-extension), lateral bending, and axial rotation. Three-dimensional kinematics were recorded to evaluate ROM. RESULTS: The C7 group had greater flexion-extension motion than the T1 and T2 groups following instrumentation (10.17±0.83 degree vs. 2.77±1.66 degree and 1.06±0.55 degree, P <0.001), and after cyclic loading (10.42±2.30 degree vs. 2.47±0.64 degree and 1.99±1.23 degree, P <0.001). There was no significant difference between the T1 and T2 groups. The C7 group had greater lateral bending ROM than both thoracic groups after instrumentation (8.81±3.44 degree vs. 3.51±2.52 degree, P =0.013 and 1.99±1.99 degree, P =0.003) and after cyclic loading. The C7 group had greater axial rotation motion than the thoracic groups (4.46±2.27 degree vs. 1.26±0.69 degree, P =0.010; and 0.73±0.74 degree, P =0.003) following cyclic loading. CONCLUSION: Motion at the cervicothoracic junction is significantly greater when a multilevel PCF stops at C7 rather than T1 or T2. This is likely attributable to the transition from a flexible cervical spine to a rigid thoracic spine. Although this does not account for in vivo fusion, surgeons should consider extending multilevel PCF constructs to T1 when feasible. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Not applicable.

All-Suture Suspensory Button Has Similar Biomechanical Performance to Metal Suspensory Button for Onlay Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.

Purpose: To evaluate the maximal load at failure, cyclic displacement, and stiffness of onlay subpectoral biceps tenodesis (BT) with an intramedullary unicortical metal button (MB) versus a unicortical all-suture button (ASB). Methods: Eighteen matched paired human cadaveric proximal humeri were randomly allocated for subpectoral BT with either ASB or MB using a high-strength suture. Specimens were tested on a servohydraulic mechanical testing apparatus under cyclic load for 1,000 cycles and then loaded to failure. The clamp was then adjusted to isolate the suture-anchor point interface and loaded to failure. Maximal load to failure, displacement, and stiffness were compared. Results: There was no significant difference between groups in stiffness, displacement, or yield load. The maximal load to failure for the MB was greater than the ASB (347.6 ± 74.1N vs 266.5 ± 69.3N, P = .047). Eight specimens in each group failed by suture pull-through on the tendon. When the suture-anchor point interface was isolated, there was no significant difference in maximal load at failure (MB 586.5 ± 215.8N vs ASB 579.6 ± 255.9N, P = .957). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the MB and ASB have similar biomechanical performance when used in subpectoral BT. Although the MB showed statistically significant greater maximal load to failure, there was no difference between the MB and ASB when the suture-tendon interface was eliminated. Suture pull-through was the most common mode of failure for both implants, underscoring the importance of the suture-tendon interface. Clinical Relevance: Fixation techniques for the treatment of long head of the biceps brachii tenodesis continue to evolve. The use of an all-suture suspensory button has advantages, but it is important to understand if this implant is a biomechanically suitable alternative to a metal suspensory button.

Intramedullary Unicortical Button and All-Suture Anchors Provide Similar Maximum Strength for Onlay Distal Biceps Tendon Repair.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the biomechanical profile of onlay distal biceps repair with an intramedullary unicortical button versus all-suture anchors under cyclic loading and maximal load to failure. METHODS: Twenty paired fresh-frozen human cadaveric elbows were randomized to onlay distal biceps repair with either a single intramedullary button or with two 1.35-mm all-suture anchors. A 1.3-mm high tensile strength tape was used in a Krackow stitch to suture the tendons in both groups. Specimens and repair constructs were loaded for 3,000 cycles and then loaded to failure. Maximum load to failure, mode of failure, and construct elongation were recorded. RESULTS: Mean (± standard deviation) maximum load to failure for the unicortical intramedullary button and all-suture anchor repairs were 503.23 ± 141.77 N and 537.33 ± 262.13 N (P = .696), respectively. Mean maximum displacement after 3,000 cycles (± standard deviation) was 4.17 ± 2.05 mm in the button group and 2.06 ± 1.05 mm in the suture anchor group (P = .014). Mode of failure in the button group was suture tape rupture in 7 specimens, failure at the tendon-suture interface in 2 specimens, and button pullout in 1 specimen. Anchor pullout was the mode of failure in all suture anchor specimens. There were no tendon ruptures or radial tuberosity fractures in either group. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that onlay distal biceps repair with 2 all-suture anchors has similar maximum strength to repair with an intramedullary button and that both are viable options for fixation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: All-suture anchors and unicortical intramedullary button have similar maximum strength at time zero. Both constructs provide suitable fixation for onlay distal biceps repair.

Biomechanical Comparison of Anatomic Restoration of the Ulnar Footprint vs Traditional Ulnar Tunnels in Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Current techniques for ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction do not reproduce the anatomic ulnar footprint of the UCL. The purpose of this study was to describe a novel UCL reconstruction technique that utilizes proximal-to-distal ulnar bone tunnels to better re-create the anatomy of the UCL and to compare the biomechanical profile at time zero among this technique, the native UCL, and the traditional docking technique. HYPOTHESIS: The biomechanical profile of the anatomic technique is similar to the native UCL and traditional docking technique. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Ten matched cadaveric elbows were potted with the forearm in neutral rotation. The palmaris longus tendon graft was harvested, and bones were sectioned 14 cm proximal and distal to the elbow joint. Specimen testing included (1) native UCL testing performed at 90° of flexion with 0.5 N·m of valgus moment preload, (2) cyclic loading from 0.5 to 5 N·m of valgus moment for 1000 cycles at 1 Hz, and (3) load to failure at 0.2 mm/s. Elbows then underwent UCL reconstruction with 1 elbow of each pair receiving the classic docking technique using either anatomic (proximal to distal) or traditional (anterior to posterior) tunnel locations. Specimen testing was then repeated as described. RESULTS: There were no differences in maximum load at failure between the anatomic and traditional tunnel location techniques (mean ± SD, 34.90 ± 10.65 vs 37.28 ± 14.26 N·m; P = .644) or when including the native UCL (45.83 ± 17.03 N·m; P = .099). Additionally, there were no differences in valgus angle after 1000 cycles across the anatomic technique (4.58°± 1.47°), traditional technique (4.08°± 1.28°), and native UCL (4.07°± 1.99°). The anatomic group and the native UCL had similar valgus angles at failure (24.13°± 5.86° vs 20.13°± 5.70°; P = .083), while the traditional group had a higher valgus angle at failure when compared with the native UCL (24.88°± 6.18° vs 19.44°± 5.86°; P = .015). CONCLUSION: In this cadaveric model, UCL reconstruction with the docking technique utilizing proximal-to-distal ulnar tunnels better restored the ulnar footprint while providing valgus stability comparable with reconstruction with the docking technique using traditional anterior-to-posterior ulnar tunnel locations. These results suggest that utilization of the anatomic tunnel location in UCL reconstruction has similar biomechanical properties to the traditional method at the time of initial fixation (ie, not accounting for healing after reconstruction in vivo) while keeping the ulnar tunnels farther from the ulnar nerve. Further studies are warranted to determine if an anatomically based UCL reconstruction results in differing outcomes than traditional reconstruction techniques. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Current UCL reconstruction techniques do not accurately re-create the ulnar UCL footprint. The UCL is a dynamic constraint to valgus loads at the elbow, and a more anatomic reconstruction may afford more natural joint kinematics. This more anatomic technique performs similarly to the traditional docking technique at time zero, and the results of this study may offer a starting point for future in vivo studies.

A Biomechanical Comparison of High-Tensile Strength Tape Versus High-Tensile Strength Suture for Tendon Fixation Under Cyclic Loading.

PURPOSE: To compare the biomechanical properties of high-tensile strength tape and high-tensile strength suture across 2 selected stitch techniques, the Krackow and whip stitch, in securing tendinous tissue during 5,000 cycles of nondestructive loading followed by a load to failure. METHODS: Fourteen matched pairs each of cadaveric Achilles, quadriceps, and patellar tendons (n = 84) were randomly assigned to either Krackow or whip stitch and sutured with either 2-mm high-tensile strength tape or No. 2 high-tensile strength suture. Specimens were preloaded to 20 N, cyclically loaded from 20 to 200 N for 5,000 cycles at 2 Hz, and then loaded to failure at 200 mm/min. Linear mixed models evaluated the effects of suture material and stitch technique on cyclic normalized tendon-suture elongation, total normalized tendon-suture elongation at 5,000 cycles, and maximum load at failure. RESULTS: Across all suture constructs, normalized elongation was greater during the initial 10 cycles, compared with all subsequent cycling intervals (all P < .001). There was less total normalized elongation (ß = -0.239; P = .007) and greater maximum load at failure in tape (ß = 163.71; P = .014) when used in the Krackow stitch compared with the whip stitch. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that tape used in the Krackow stitch maintains the most favorable fixation strength after enduring cyclic loading, with greater maximum load at failure. In addition, overall normalized elongation during long-term cyclic loading was predominately affected by the stitch technique used, regardless of the suture material; however, tape allowed less normalized elongation during the initial loading cycles, especially when placed in the whip stitch. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding the potential short- and long-term outcomes of suture material and stitch technique on securing tendinous tissue under repetitive stresses can help inform clinicians on optimal tendon fixation techniques for early postoperative activities.

An Investigation of a Novel Tendon Transfer Surgery for High Median-Ulnar Nerve Palsy in a Chicken Model.

PURPOSE: The state-of-the-art tendon transfer surgery for high median-ulnar nerve palsy involves directly suturing four finger flexor tendons to one wrist extensor muscle. This couples finger flexion limiting the patient's ability to grasp objects. Therefore, we propose a new approach to attach a novel passive implant to the extensor digitorum longus tendon in order to create a differential mechanism in situ. The implant is expected to enable the fingers to adapt to an object's shape during grasping. Chickens have been used as a model in tendon research, but studies have primarily focused on the digital flexor tendon mechanism. Thus, the aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of the chicken model for extensor tendon research and to validate the surgical technique for a new approach to tendon transfer surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine chickens were randomly divided into three groups: implant (n = 12), sham (n = 10), and control (n = 7). Postoperative healing and complications were documented. RESULTS: Surgery was successful in all chickens. All animals healed appropriately by Day 16 postoperatively. Chickens in the implant group experienced significantly more intermittent toe-knuckling gait than the sham group (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The described surgical technique allowed for successful application of a novel implantable passive mechanism in a live chicken model. In combination with previous work, findings from the present study further validated a novel tendon-transfer surgery for high median-ulnar nerve palsy. Based on the degree of intermittent abnormal gait experienced by the implant group, refinement to the implant design is warranted in future studies.