Nonanatomic Tibial Tunnel Placement for Single-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Leads to Greater Posterior Tibial Translation in a Biomechanical Model.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect of varying proximal-distal tibial tunnel placement on posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) laxity. METHODS: Nine matched pairs (18 total) of cadaveric knees (mean age 79.3 years, range 60 to 89), were studied. The specimens from each pair were randomly divided into 2 groups based on tibial tunnel placement: (1) anatomic tunnel and (2) proximal nonanatomic tunnel. A 150-N cyclic posterior tibial load was applied using a Materials Testing System machine at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion. Each specimen completed 50 cycles at a rate of 0.2 Hz at each knee flexion angle. In 10 specimens, a static 250-N posterior tibial load was applied at 90° of knee flexion. Posterior tibial translation was recorded. Load to failure for all specimens was recorded. RESULTS: With application of a 150-N posteriorly directed cyclic force, the anatomic tunnel group had significantly less posterior tibial translation (millimeters, mean [standard deviation (SD)]) than the proximal nonanatomic tunnel group at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion: 1.1 (0.3) v 1.5 (0.4), P = .031; 1.1 (0.6) v 2.2 (0.9), P = .019; 0.9 (0.4) v 2.0 (0.6), P = .001; 0.9 (0.6) v 2.9 (0.7), P < .001, respectively. The anatomic tunnel group also demonstrated significantly less posterior tibial translation (millimeters, mean [SD]) than the nonanatomic tunnel group at 90° with a static 250-N posteriorly directed force applied (P <.05): 2.3 (1.3) v 6.1 (2.3), P = .016. Four pairs were excluded from the 250-N results because of prior load to failure testing. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic tibial tunnel placement re-creating the tibial origin of the PCL results in significantly less posterior tibial translation than proximal nonanatomic tibial tunnel placement. Correct placement of the tibial tunnel during PCL reconstruction is essential for avoidance of posterior laxity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Anatomic tibial tunnel placement during PCL reconstruction may ensure a more stable reconstruction.

Biomechanical Contribution of Tension-Reducing Rotator Cuff Sutures in 3-Part Proximal Humerus Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: Using a cadaveric 3-part fracture model and cyclic loading protocol, our study objectives were to quantify the stabilizing effect of tension-reducing rotator cuff sutures in terms of fracture displacement across the surgical neck and greater tuberosity compared with a control group in which no sutures were used. METHODS: Six matched pairs of fresh frozen specimens underwent a standardized, 3-part, proximal humerus fracture and were split into 2 groups. The control group had the fracture fixed with a plate and screw construct only while the experimental group had additional suture fixation through the plate to each rotator cuff tendon. Active abduction through the rotator cuff was simulated for 100, 200, 300, and 400 cycles and to failure at 1000 N. A Mann-Whitney U test compared cyclic displacement of the greater tuberosity and surgical neck fracture gaps and load to failure between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference (P > 0.05) in fracture gap between fixation methods at the surgical neck at 100 (P = 0.13), 200 (P = 0.07), 300 (P = 0.49), and 400 (P = 0.07) cycles. There was no significant difference (P > 0.05) between fixation methods in the fracture gap at the greater tuberosity at 100 (P = 0.39), 200 (P = 1.00), 300 (P = 0.31), and 400 (P = 0.59) cycles. There was no significant difference (P > 0.5) at 1000 N at the surgical neck (P = 0.70) or the greater tuberosity (P = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: Tension-relieving rotator cuff sutures do not add stability to the repair of 3-part proximal humerus fractures. Varus collapse and greater tuberosity displacement are common complications associated with 3-part fractures. No mechanical data exist to demonstrate benefit of adding suture to a plate and screw construct for limiting fracture displacement.