A Single-Center, Observational Study Assessing Functional Outcomes After Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Suspensory Tibial Fixation With a Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Button.

Background Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a crucial procedure in orthopedic surgery. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of ACLR employing suspensory tibial fixation with a polyether ether ketone (PEEK) button. Methodology This retrospective observational study conducted at Sai Shree Hospital, Pune, India, between November 2023 and December 2023 enrolled 47 subjects aged 18-60 years who underwent arthroscopic ACLR utilizing the T-Button-A Adjustable Loop Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight Polyethylene Suture PEEK button. The functional outcomes and patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, the Modified Cincinnati Rating System Questionnaire (MCRS), the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, the Tegner Activity Level (TAL) Scale, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) quality of life subscale. Results Femoral fixation utilized 27 (57.4%) Proloop Ultra Adjustable Loop Button 60 mm, 19 (40.4%) Infiloop Fixed Loop Button 20 mm, and 1 (2.1%) Infiloop Fixed Loop Button 30 mm. Tibial fixation solely relied on T-Button A (PEEK Tibial Button With Adjustable Loop 90 mm). Postoperative evaluations revealed favorable IKDC (79.49 ± 12.67), MCRS (81.32 ± 11.57), SANE (77.83 ± 11.11), TAL Scale (3.87 ± 0.99) and KOOS quality of life subscale (83.81 ± 13.07) scores. Conclusions The findings affirm the efficacy and safety of arthroscopic ACLR utilizing suspensory tibial fixation with the PEEK button, supporting its use for improved patient outcomes.

Clinical Outcomes of Modified Suture Buttons for Tibial Side Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

Introduction Restoring knee joint stability and resuming sports activities are important objectives of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The maintenance of anterior knee stability after ACL reconstruction is contingent on graft tension. Various devices and techniques have been used to achieve robust tibial graft tendon fixation, and their advantages and disadvantages are established. However, a gold standard has not been established. Therefore, we aimed to determine whether anterior knee joint stability and clinical outcomes of graft tendon fixation could be improved using a recently modified suture button (MSB) compared with using an adjustable suspensory fixator (ASF) at 1 year after double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Methods This study retrospectively analyzed postoperative data derived from 79 patients at a single center between January 2016 and December 2021. The patients were assigned to groups that underwent double-bundle ACL reconstruction with tibial fixation using an MSB (n = 30) that maintains tension while tying sutures, or an ASF (n = 49). We then compared complications, clinical outcomes and knee joint stability at 1 year postoperatively. Rates of postoperative infection, graft rupture, implant removal and residual anterior knee laxity (AKL) were compared between the groups using chi-square tests. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) based on Forgot Joint Score-12, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome, and Lysholm Knee scores were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests. Results One patient in the MSB group developed postoperative infection. Rates of graft rupture and implant removal in the MSB and ASF groups were 3.3% and 4.1%, and 3.6% and 10.2%, respectively. None of the PROMs differed between the groups. The proportions of postoperative AKL were 3.6% and 14.9% in the MSB and ASF groups, respectively. A trend towards lower postoperative AKL in the MSB group did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.25). Conclusions The incidence of AKL at a year after ACL reconstruction using the MSB was 3%. Postoperative AKL and clinical outcomes were comparable between the MSB and ASF groups. A low AKL rate and positive postoperative outcomes indicated that MSB could be an option for tibial-side fixation in ACL reconstruction.

Short-term results of tibial interference screw fixation for transtibial medial meniscus posterior root pull-out repair.

Background: To evaluate the technique of transtibial pull-out repair with tibial interference screw fixation for medial meniscus posterior root (MMPR) tear by reporting on short-term outcomes and complications. Methods: All MMPR repairs performed between January 2019 and August 2021 (n = 70) were retrospectively screened regarding demographic data and surgical parameters. The patients were questioned for performed revision surgery, symptoms and complications. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, Lysholm Knee Score and International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC) questionnaires were used to evaluate clinical outcome. In cases of revision surgery for re-tear the mode of failure was intraoperatively classified (patients with re-tear were excluded from the clinical follow-up examination). The influence of demographic and treatment parameters (surgical and rehabilitation) on the incidence and mode of re-tear and clinical scores was evaluated. Results: After 2.3 ± 0.7 years, 62 patients (88.6 %) were available for follow-up. There were no direct intra- or postoperative complications. No revision was performed due to symptoms related to the tibial fixation material. The mean surgery time was 33.5 ± 10.8 min. The overall re-tear rate was 17.7 % (11 patients) of whom 10 were treated surgically and one conservatively. Primary mode of failure was suture cut-out from the meniscus (70 %). The NRS, Lysholm Knee Score and subjective IKDC were obtained in 38 patients and improved from 6.8 ± 2.4, 40.1 ± 23.9 and 32.8 ± 16.3 to 2.2 ± 2.2, 80.5 ± 16.3 and 63.0 ± 13.9, respectively (all p < 0.001). No influence was observed from demographic and treatment parameters on re-tear rates or clinical Scores. Conclusions: Tibial interference screw fixation is a fast and promising technique for MMPR transtibial pull-out repair. In the presented technique, utilizing non-absorbable locking sutures alongside tibial interfenrence screw fixation, the primary mode of failure was suture cut-out from the meniscus.

Biomechanical Evaluation of TensionLoc Versus the Double Spike Plate for ACL Graft Tibial Fixation.

Background: The optimal tibial fixation of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) grafts remains controversial. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical characteristics of the TensionLoc (TL) cortical fixation device with the Double Spike Plate (DSP) fixation device for ACL tibial fixation using both bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) and quadriceps grafts. It was hypothesized that there would be no differences in biomechanical characteristics between the fixation devices regardless of graft type. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: ACLR was performed on 14 matched-pair cadaveric knee specimens-7 pairs using quadriceps grafts (n = 3 male cadaveric knee specimens; n = 4 female cadaveric knee specimens; age, 51 ± 8 years) and 7 pairs using BTB grafts (n = 3 male cadaveric knee specimens; n = 4 female cadaveric knee specimens; age, 50 ± 7 years). One side of each pair was randomized to receive DSP fixation, and the contralateral side received TL fixation. Specimens underwent cyclic ramp loading (10 cycles each at 50-100 N, 50-250 N, and 50-400 N), followed by load-to-failure testing, with the tensile force in line with the tibial tunnel. Results between the 2 fixation types were compared with a paired t test. Results: For the quadriceps graft, there were no significant differences in cyclic loading or load-to-failure characteristics between fixation types (P≥ .092 for all parameters). For the BTB graft, TL fixation resulted in higher stiffness than DSP at all cyclic testing cycles except for cycle 1 during 100-N loading and had lower displacement at 250-N loading (3.4 ± 0.1 vs 5.4 ± 0.3 mm; P = .045). For load to failure, TL fixation resulted in higher stiffness than DSP fixation (232 ± 3.1 vs 188.4 ± 6.4 N/mm; P = .046); however, all other load-to-failure parameters were not statistically different (P≥ .135 for all parameters). Conclusion: With the quadriceps tendon graft, there were no significant differences in biomechanical characteristics between TL and DSP ACL tibial fixations; however, with BTB grafts, the TL tibial fixation demonstrated greater biomechanical integrity than the DSP tibial fixation. Clinical Relevance: The TL fixation device may provide an alternative ACL tibial fixation option for BTB and soft tissue grafts.

Uncemented Tibial Fixation Has Comparable Prognostic Outcomes and Safety Versus Cemented Fixation in Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Cemented and uncemented fixation are the primary methods of tibial prosthesis fixation in total knee arthroplasty. However, the optimal fixation method remains controversial. This article explored whether uncemented tibial fixation has better clinical and radiological outcomes, fewer complications, and revision rates compared to cemented tibial fixation. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases up to September 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared uncemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and cemented TKA. The outcome assessment consisted of clinical and radiological outcomes, complications (aseptic loosening, infection, and thrombosis), and revision rate. Subgroup analysis was used to explore the effects of different fixation methods on knee scores in younger patients. RESULTS: Nine RCTs were finally analyzed with 686 uncemented knees and 678 cemented knees. The mean follow-up time was 12.6 years. The pooled data revealed significant advantages of uncemented fixations over cemented fixations in terms of the Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS) (p = 0.01) and the Knee Society Score-Pain (KSS-Pain) (p = 0.02). Cemented fixations showed significant advantages in maximum total point motion (MTPM) (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between uncemented fixation and cemented fixation regarding functional outcomes, range of motion, complications, and revision rates. When comparing among young people (<65 years), the differences in KSKS became statistically insignificant. No significant difference was shown in aseptic loosening and the revision rate among young patients. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence shows better knee score, less pain, comparable complications and revision rates for uncemented tibial prosthesis fixation, compared to cemented, in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty.

A prospective randomised controlled trial of cemented and uncemented tibial baseplates: functional and radiological outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: With the success of uncemented fixation in younger patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty and the growing demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in a younger cohort of patients, there has been an increasing interest in cementless tibial baseplate fixation. We sought to determine whether there was a clear advantage to the use of three different forms of tibial baseplate fixation. The primary outcome of this study was survivorship and secondary outcomes were functional and radiological outcomes, up until 10 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a randomised controlled trial and recruited 224 patients with 274 knees. Patients underwent TKA by a single surgeon utilising a standard surgical technique. All patients received a cruciate retaining TKA with a cementless femoral component, and were randomised to receive either a cemented tibial component, a pegged porous coated cementless tibial component with screws or a cementless tantalum monoblock tibial component with pegs. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMS), radiological data and survivorship were assessed until 10 years post-operatively. RESULTS: Pre-operative range of motion, alignment and PROMS were similar between the three groups. The use of cemented, cementless with screws or cementless with pegs fixation options, lead to differences in functional outcomes. There was greater improvement in the Oxford score and Knee Society Score in patients who received a cemented baseplate compared to tantalum and the pegged porous groups. However, radiological and survival outcomes were similar in all three groups. Overall survivorship was 99.6%, with one knee with cementless tibial fixation and screws revised for subsidence at 3 years. There were no cases of venous thromboembolism, periprosthetic fracture or infection. CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of tibial fixation method, functional and radiological outcomes remain similar at follow-up at 10 years, with no clear difference in outcome between each group. Each method of fixation also had excellent survivorship over this period and should reassure surgeons that whichever method of fixation they choose, long-term outcomes are likely to be satisfactory.

Biomechanical comparison of Tibial-sided supplemental fixation techniques in Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of a commercially available suture anchor and a screw post for supplemental tibial fixation of a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) graft at time zero. We hypothesized that supplemental fixation using a suture anchor would demonstrate similar biomechanical performance in comparison with a screw post. METHODS: Sixteen fresh frozen, healthy human cadaveric knees underwent BTB autograft harvest, placement, and primary tibial-sided interference screw fixation using a standardized technique performed by a single surgeon. Specimens were randomly assigned to one of two tibial-sided supplemental fixation groups (suture anchor or screw post), yielding eight specimens in each group. Each specimen was affixed to a custom loading apparatus, with the tibial tunnel aligned in a vertical position that allowed for parallel "worst-case scenario" loading and eliminated loading variation due to tibial tunnel angle. Grafts were pretensioned to 30 N and biomechanical performance was compared with respect to cyclical loading between 50-250 N for 500 cycles at 0.5 Hz and pull-to-failure loading at 60 mm/min. RESULTS: The suture anchor and screw post supplemental constructs demonstrated similar performance with respect to all biomechanical parameters assessed, including yield strength (294.0 N [IQR 267.2-304.2 N] versus 332.1 N [IQR 313.8-350.4 N]; P = 0.079) and ultimate strength (330.1 N [IQR 306.9-418.7 N] versus 374.7 N [IQR 362.0-387.3 N]; P = 0.3798). However, of the eight original specimens in each group, one suture anchor specimen (12.5%) and six metallic screw post specimens (75%) failed during cyclical testing and were unable to undergo displacement and load to failure testing. CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence that supplemental tibial-sided fixation of a BTB ACL graft with a suture anchor has similar loading characteristics or load-to-failure strength when compared to supplemental fixation with a screw post construct. STUDY DESIGN: Laboratory Controlled Study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic Science Study.

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.

Chitranjan S. Ranawat Award: Motion During Total Knee Cementing Significantly Decreases Tibial Implant Fixation Strength.

BACKGROUND: Aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee arthroplasty persists despite technique and device-related advancements. The mechanisms for this mode of failure are not well understood. We hypothesized that knee movement while the cement was curing dispersed lipids at the implant-cement interface and would result in decreased tibial fixation strength. METHODS: A cadaveric study was performed utilizing 32 torso-to-toe specimens (64 knees). Four contemporary total knee arthroplasty designs were evaluated. Each implant design was randomly assigned to a cadaveric specimen pair with side-to-side randomization. Specimen densitometry was recorded. Each tibial implant was cemented using a standard technique. On one side, the tibial component was held without motion following impaction until complete cement polymerization. The contralateral knee tibial implant was taken through gentle range of motion and stability assessment 7 minutes after cement mixing. Axial tibial pull-out strength and interface failure examination was performed on each specimen. RESULTS: The average pull-out strength for the no motion cohort (5,462 N) exceeded the motion cohort (4,473 N) (P = .001). The mean pull-out strength between implant designs in the no motion cohort varied significantly (implant A: 7,230 N, B: 5,806 N, C: 5,325 N, D 3,486 N; P = .007). Similarly, the motion cohort inter-implant variance was significant (P ≤ .001). Intra-implant pull-out strength was significantly higher in implant A than D. The average pull-out strength was significantly lower in specimens that failed at the implant-cement interface vs bone failures (4,089 ± 2,158 N vs 5,960 ± 2,010 N, P < .0025). CONCLUSION: Knee motion during cement polymerization is associated with significant decreases in tibial implant fixational strength. Reduction in implant pull-out strength was identified with each implant design with motion and varied between designs. Across all tested designs, we recommend limiting motion while cementing the tibial implant to improve fixation strength.

Does a combined screw and dowel construct improve tibial fixation during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?

PURPOSE: The aims of the present study were to compare the biomechanical properties of tibial fixation in hamstring-graft ACL reconstruction using interference screw and a novel combination interference screw and dowel construct. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We compared the fixation of 30 (2- and 4-stranded gracilis and semitendinosis tendons) in 15 fresh-frozen porcine tibiae with a biocomposite resorbable interference screw (Group 1) and a screw and dowel construct (Group 2). Each graft was subjected to load-to-failure testing (50 mm/min) to determine maximum load, displacement at failure and pullout strength. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the biomechanical properties of the constructs. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that combination constructs (ß = 140.20, p = 0.043), screw diameter (ß = 185, p = 0.006) and 4-strand grafts (ß = 51, p = 0.050) were associated with a significant increase in load at failure. Larger screw diameter was associated with increased construct stiffness (ß = 20.15, p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: The screw and dowel construct led to significantly increased fixation properties compared to interference screws alone in a porcine model. Increased screw diameter and utilization of 4-strand ACL grafts also led to improvement in load-to-failure of the construct. However, this is an in vitro study and additional investigations are needed to determine whether the results are reproducible in vivo. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V; Biomechanical study.

Biomechanical Comparison of a Novel Tibial Fixation Technique Versus Interference Screw Fixation for ACL Reconstruction Using Soft Tissue Grafts.

BACKGROUND: Controversy remains regarding the optimal technique for tibial fixation of soft tissue grafts in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To compare the biomechanical outcomes of a novel transtibial tubercle fixation technique with those of a commonly utilized interference screw fixation at the tibial site. Our hypothesis was that transtibial tubercle fixation achieves higher ultimate failure loads than interference screw fixation. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: We used 24 matched porcine tibias and digital extensor tendons, from which 12 grafts and tibial tunnels were prepared using the novel transtibial tubercle fixation technique and 12 were prepared using the interference screw fixation technique. The specimens underwent a cyclic loading test (50-250 N applied for 1000 cycles at a frequency of 1 Hz), followed by a load-to-failure test. The slippage, stiffness, and ultimate failure loads were compared between the techniques. RESULTS: No differences in slippage were found during the cyclic loading test, and no graft fixation or tibial complex failures occurred during cyclic testing in either group. The transtibial tubercle fixation technique had higher ultimate failure loads (mean ± SD, 756.28 ± 123.43 N) as compared with interference screw fixation (602.15 ± 81.62 N; P < .05). The grafts in the transtibial tubercle fixation group were less stiff than those in the interference screw fixation group (84.43 vs 101.23 N/mm; P < .05). CONCLUSION: Transtibial tubercle fixation achieved higher ultimate failure loads than interference screw fixation in the load-to-failure test. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The novel transtibial tubercle fixation technique compared favorably with interference screw fixation during ACL reconstruction. This technique does not require hardware, has a low cost, theoretically eliminates the risk of complications associated with hardware implantation (eg, graft damage and pain attributed to retained hardware requiring removal), and is relatively easy to perform.

Uncemented tantalum metal components versus cemented tibial components in total knee arthroplasty: 11- to 15-year outcomes of a single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: Total knee arthroplasty is an established treatment for knee osteoarthritis with excellent long-term results, but there remains controversy about the role of uncemented prostheses. We present the long-term results of a randomized trial comparing an uncemented tantalum metal tibial component with a conventional cemented component of the same implant design. METHODS: Patients under the age of 70 years with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee were randomized to receive either an uncemented tantalum metal tibial monoblock component or a standard cemented modular component. The mean age at time of recruitment to the study was 63 years (50 to 70), 46 (51.1%) knees were in male patients, and the mean body mass index was 30.4 kg/m2 (21 to 36). The same cruciate retaining total knee system was used in both groups. All patients received an uncemented femoral component and no patients had their patella resurfaced. Patient outcomes were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively using the modified Oxford Knee Score, Knee Society Score, and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-12) score. Radiographs were analyzed using the American Knee Society Radiograph Evaluation score. Operative complications, reoperations, or revision surgery were recorded. A total of 90 knees were randomized and at last review 77 knees were assessed. In all, 11 patients had died and two were lost to follow-up. RESULTS: At final review all patients were between 11 and 15 years following surgery. In total, 41 of the knees were cemented and 36 uncemented. There were no revisions in the cemented group and one revision in the uncemented group for fracture. The uncemented group reported better outcomes with both statistically and clinically significant (p = 0.001) improvements in knee-specific Oxford and Knee Society scores compared with the cemented group. The global SF-12 scores demonstrated no statistical difference (p = 0.812). Uncemented knees had better radiological analysis compared with the cemented group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Use of an uncemented trabecular metal tibial implant can afford better long-term clinical outcomes when compared to cemented tibial components of a matched design. However, both have excellent survivorship up to 15 years after implantation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1025-1032.

Significant Loss of ACL Graft Force With Tibial-Sided Soft Tissue Interference Screw Fixation Over 24 Hours: A Biomechanical Study.

BACKGROUND: Tibial-sided graft fixation is thought to be critical for the success of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Nevertheless, little is known about the graft force after fixation during the first 24 hours after surgery or the influence of screw diameter and length during this time. PURPOSE: To investigate the force, over the course of 24 hours, in soft tissue grafts secured with a tibial interference screw and to evaluate the effect of different screw diameters (7, 8, and 9 mm) and lengths (25 and 30 mm) on the force in these grafts. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Quadruple-strand flexor tendon grafts were fixed with bioabsorbable interference screws in 60 porcine tibiae. Grafts were pretensioned at 80 N over 10 minutes, and screws were inserted outside-in while a preload force of 80 N was applied. Different screw lengths (25 and 30 mm) and diameters (7, 8, and 9 mm), resulting in 6 groups with 10 specimens each, were tested. After release of the preload, graft force was recorded over 24 hours. RESULTS: A significant decrease in graft force progressed in all groups over the 24-hour period. In total, a median loss of 75 N (IQR, 68-79 N) compared with the initial loading force was observed. Compared with the loading force of 80 N, this corresponded to a median loss of 91%. No significant differences in the remaining graft force could be found among the 6 different screw length and diameter groups after 10 minutes, 100 minutes, or 24 hours. CONCLUSION: Graft force in soft tissue grafts secured with a tibial interference screw decreased substantially over the first 24 hours after fixation. Neither the screw diameter nor the screw length affected the decrease in graft force. This raises substantial questions regarding the remaining fixation strength in vivo. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It should not be expected that ACL reconstruction can mechanically restabilize an injured knee as would an intact ACL. Reconstructed knees should be protected from mechanical overload in the early postoperative period.

Knotless Anchor Fixation for Transosseous Meniscal Root Repair Using Suture Tape Is Inferior Compared With Button or Screw Fixation: A Biomechanical Study.

BACKGROUND: A 2 mm-wide ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) tape improves the contact pressure at root repair sites compared with high-strength suture and provides a stronger repair construct. UHMWPE tape is commonly used in rotator cuff repair, and fixation is often achieved with knotless suture anchors. The optimal method for tape fixation for meniscal root repair has not been established. HYPOTHESIS: The use of suture anchors for the tibial fixation of 2-mm UHMWPE tape transosseous root repairs will lead to better biomechanical performance compared with other fixation methods. METHODS: The medial meniscal posterior root attachment in 25 porcine knees was divided, and a standardized transtibial root repair was performed using 2-mm UHMWPE tape. The testing was performed by cyclic loading followed by load to failure. Tibial fixation was randomized to 5 tibial fixation types: (1) cortical fixation button, (2) pound-in suture anchor with screw-down interference suture locking, (3) tap-in suture anchor with inner locking plug, (4) postscrew, and (5) postscrew and washer. RESULTS: There was no difference in displacement during cyclic loading between tibial fixation groups except for a highly significant difference in the maximum load at failure. Repairs in both suture anchor fixation groups all failed by tape slippage at relatively low loads (median, 145 and 116 N, respectively). Repairs tied over a cortical button, postscrew, or screw and washer failed by tape breakage at loads of 431, 405, and 528 N. CONCLUSION: For meniscal root repairs with 2-mm UHMWPE tape, use of suture anchors offers weaker fixation compared with tying over a button or postscrew/washer. While suture anchor fixation may be adequate for nonweightbearing postoperative protocols, it may not allow for more accelerated weightbearing.

Femoral-tibial fixation affects risk of revision and reoperation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring autograft.

PURPOSE: Newer fixation devices for hamstring (HS) autograft have been introduced over the years, yet the impact of these devices on ACLR outcomes requiring surgical intervention remains unclear. We sought to evaluate the risk of aseptic revision and reoperation after HS autograft ACLR according to various femoral-tibial fixation methods. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted using the Kaiser Permanente ACLR Registry. Primary isolated unilateral ACLR patients who received a HS autograft were identified (2007-2014). Fixation devices were categorized as crosspin, interference, suspensory, or combination (defined as more than one fixation device used on the same side) and femoral-tibial fixation groups used in more than 500 ACLR were evaluated. Cox proportional-hazard regression was used to evaluate the association between femoral-tibial fixation method and outcomes while adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: 6,593 primary ACLR were included. Four femoral-tibial fixation groups had more than 500 ACLR: suspensory-interference (n = 3004, 45.6%), interference-interference (n = 1659, 25.2%), suspensory-combination (n = 1103, 16.7%), and crosspin-interference (n = 827, 12.5%). After adjusting for covariates, revision risk was lower for crosspin-interference (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.29-0.65) and interference-interference (HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.41-0.95) methods compared to the suspensory-interference. In contrast, reoperation risk was higher for crosspin-interference (HR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.37-3.32) and suspensory-combination (HR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.04-2.69) methods compared to suspensory-interference. CONCLUSIONS: ACLR using HS autograft appears to have the lowest risk of aseptic revision when crosspin or interference fixation is used on the femoral side and is coupled with an interference screw on the tibial side. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

The functional outcome of arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients using different graft tension during tibial fixation

Background@# Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction is commonly performed to restore knee kinematics and halt the progression of osteoarthritis. A primary variable that could infl uence the outcome of ACL reconstruction is the tension applied to the graft at the time of fi xation. If the tension is too great, an abnormal compressive force could potentially develop across the tibiofemoral joint, hindering knee motion, and subjecting the articular surfaces to increased stress. If the tension in the graft is too low, the graft will not be effective in restoring normal kinematics. The Tegner Lysholm Knee Scale is a functional scoring for patients with ligamentous injuries. It is a patient-reported measure of knee function and is important for comprehensive assessment conditions in both the clinical and research context. Our objective was to compare which tension technique (15 lbs graft tension using a Mitek Tensioner™ vs maximal sustained two-hand technique) would yield better functional outcome at 6 months and 12 months postoperatively using the Tegner Lysholm Knee Scale. @*Methods @#Twenty-nine patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction at the University of Santo Tomas Hospital Private Division were randomly divided equally into two groups (group A or group B). During tibial fi xation, group A would receive 15 lbs graft tension using a Mitek Tensioner and group B would receive graft tension using the maximal sustained two-handed pull technique. The patients underwent a standard rehabilitation protocol at an institution of their choice and a Lysholm Scoring Scale and Tegner activity scale were self-administered at 6 months and 12 months after the surgery in order to assess their functional outcome.@*Results @#The results showed that the functional outcome scores of group A were higher than group B. The yielded p-value was 0.10 (6 months), 0.07 (12 months) for group A and 0.27 (6 months), 0.46 (12 months) for group B. The results showed no suffi cient evidence of a signifi cant difference between the effects of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with 15 lbs weight using a Mitek Tensioner (group A) and graft tension using the maximal sustained two-handed pull technique (group B) in the knee functional outcome of patients at 6 months and 12 months postoperatively@*Conclusion@#The functional outcome scores of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction using different graft tension did not show signifi cant results. Further re-evaluation of patients’ functional outcome score is necessary after 12 months postoperatively. The desired tensioning technique of the ACL surgeon would be at his/her convenience knowing beforehand the pros and cons of each technique.

The assessment of the stability of the tibial component of a novel knee arthroplasty system using radiostereometric analysis.

AIMS: The introduction of a novel design of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) must achieve outcomes at least as good as existing designs. A novel design of TKA with a reducing radius of the femoral component and a modified cam-post articulation has been released and requires assessment of the fixation to bone. Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) of the components within the first two postoperative years has been shown to be predictive of medium- to long-term fixation. The aim of this study was to assess the stability of the tibial component of this system during this period of time using RSA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cohort of 30 patients underwent primary, cemented TKA using the novel posterior stabilized fixed-bearing (ATTUNE) design. There was an even distribution of men and women (15:15). The mean age of the patients was 64 years (sd 8) at the time of surgery; their mean body mass index (BMI) was 35.4 kg/m 2 (sd 7.9). RSA was used to assess the stability of the tibial component at 6, 12, and 24 months compared with a six-week baseline examination. Patient-reported outcome measures were also assessed. RESULTS: The mean maximum total point motion (MTPM) of the tibial component between 12 and 24 months postoperatively was 0.08 mm (sd 0.08), which is well below the published threshold of 0.2 mm (p < 0.001). Patient-reported outcome measures consistently improved. CONCLUSION: The tibial component of this novel design of TKA showed stability between assessment 12 and 24 months postoperatively, suggesting an acceptably low risk of medium- to long-term failure due to aseptic loosening.

Adjustable-length loop cortical button versus interference screw fixation in quadriceps tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction - A biomechanical in vitro study.

BACKGROUND: This biomechanical cadaveric in vitro study aimed to evaluate and compare the dynamic elongation behavior and ultimate failure strength of tibial adjustable-length loop cortical button versus interference screw fixation in quadriceps tendon-based anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. METHODS: Sixteen human quadriceps tendons were harvested and fixed into porcine tibiae using either biodegradable interference screw (n = 8) or adjustable loop device (n = 8) fixation. An acrylic block was utilized for femoral adjustable loop device fixation for both groups. All constructs were precycled for 10 times at 0.5 Hz and manually retensioned before tested in position and force control mode each for 1000 cycles at 0.75 Hz according to in vitro loading conditions replicating the in vivo ACL environment. Subsequently, an ultimate failure test at 50 mm/min was performed with mode of failure noted. FINDINGS: Tibial IS fixation showed no statistically significant differences in the initial (-0.46 vs. -0.47 mm; P = 0.9780), dynamic (2.18 mm vs. 2.89 mm; P = 0,0661), and total elongation (1.72 mm vs. 2.42 mm; P = 0,0997) compared to adjustable loop device fixation. The tibial button fixation revealed an increased ultimate failure load (743.3 N vs. 606.3 N; P = 0.0027), while stiffness was decreased in comparison to screw fixation (133.2 N/mm vs. 153.5 N/mm; P = 0,0045). INTERPRETATION: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for quadriceps tendon graft using a tibial adjustable-length loop cortical button provides for comparable dynamic stabilization of the knee with increased ultimate failure load at decreased stiffness compared to screw fixation.

Biomechanical properties of adjustable extracortical graft fixations in ACL reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Reliable biomechanical data about the strength of different tibial extracortical graft fixation devices is sparse. This biomechanical study compares the properties of tibial graft fixation in ACL reconstruction with either the ACL Tight Rope™ or the Rigid Loop Adjustable™ device. The hypothesis was that both fixation devices would provide comparable results concerning gap formation during cyclic loading and ultimate failure load. METHODS: Sixteen sawbone tibiae (Sawbones™) underwent extracortical fixation of porcine flexor digitorum profundus grafts for ACL reconstruction. Either the ACL Tight Rope™ (Arthrex) or the Rigid Loop Adjustable™ (DePuy Mitek) fixation device were used, resulting in 2 groups with 8 specimens per group. Biomechanical analysis included pretensioning the constructs 10 times with 0.75 Hz, then cyclic loading of 1,000 position-controlled cycles and 1,000 force-controlled cycles applied with a servohydraulic testing machine. Elongation during cyclic loading was recorded. After this, ultimate failure load and failure mode analysis were performed. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference could be noted between the groups regarding gap formation during cyclic loading (4.6 ± 2.6 mm for the Rigid Loop Adjustable™ vs. 6.6 ± 1.5 mm for the ACL Tight Rope™ (p > 0.05)), and ultimate failure loads (980 ± 101.9 N for the Rigid Loop Adjustable™ vs. 861 ± 115 N ACL Tight Rope™ (p > 0.05)). CONCLUSION: ACL Tight Rope™ and the Rigid Loop Adjustable™ fixation devices yield comparable biomechanical results for tibial extracortical graft fixation in ACL reconstruction. These findings may be of relevance for the future surgical decision-making in ACL reconstruction. Randomized controlled clinical trials comparing both fixation devices are desirable for the future.

Comparison between uncemented and cemented fixation for the tibial component in distal femoral replacement: a clinical and radiological study.

PURPOSES: We performed a retrospective, cohort study to compare uncemented tibial fixation with cemented tibial fixation in distal femoral replacement (DFR). METHODS: Sixty-two cases with uncemented tibial fixation and 58 cases with cemented tibial fixation were included. Inter-group comparisons were performed for baseline data, oncological and prosthetic outcomes, and changes of cortical thickness of tibial diaphysis. Radiological signs of bone adaptations around the uncemented tibial stem were identified through evaluation of plain films during follow-up. RESULTS: Uncemented tibial fixation shortened operative duration by 26 minutes, achieved equivalent oncological and prosthetic outcomes, and helped preserve anterior cortical thickness of tibia compared with the cemented counterpart after a mean follow-up of over 40 months. Radiological signs of osseointegration and reactive line were observed in 64.3 and 17.9% cases with uncemented tibial fixation. The two signs had different patterns of distribution and no significant predisposing factors could be identified. CONCLUSIONS: For DFR, the uncemented tibial fixation was safe and effective in functional reconstruction and in preservation of anterior cortex of tibial diaphysis. It could achieve osseointegration and might permit adaptive micromotion of the tibial stem post-operatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: level III Therapeutic.