Biomechanical Analysis of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Aperture Femoral Fixation

被引:4
|
作者
Mutnal, Amar [1 ]
Leo, Brian M. [2 ]
Vargas, Luis [3 ]
Colbrunn, Robb W. [4 ]
Butler, Robert S. [5 ]
Uribe, John W. [3 ]
机构
[1] Cleveland Clin, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[2] Cleveland Clin Florida, Dept Orthoped Surg Sports Hlth, Weston, FL 33331 USA
[3] UHZ Sports Med Inst, Coral Gables, FL USA
[4] Cleveland Clin, Lerner Res Inst, Dept Biomed Engn, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[5] Cleveland Clin, Dept Quantitat Hlth Sci, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
关键词
SIMULATED MUSCLE LOADS; ARTHROSCOPIC SINGLE-BUNDLE; TIBIAL INLAY; KNEE-JOINT; DEFICIENCY; TRANSLATION; INJURIES; ROTATION; FLEXION; PCL;
D O I
10.3928/01477447-20150105-50
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
The goal of this study was to determine whether single-tunnel-double-bundle-equivalent posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction using an aperture femoral fixation device better replicated normal knee kinematics than single-bundle reconstruction. Eight fresh-frozen human cadaver knees underwent arthroscopically assisted PCL reconstruction and were examined with a robotic testing system to assess knee joint kinematics under combinations of applied internal, neutral, and external rotational tibial torque and anteroposterior translational forces at 0 degrees, 30 degrees, 60 degrees, 90 degrees, and 120 degrees flexion. Three conditions were tested: (1) intact PCL; (2) single-tunnel PCL reconstruction with anterolateral and posteromedial bundle fixation at 90 degrees/90 degrees (single bundle); and (3) 90 degrees/0 degrees (double-bundle equivalent), respectively. Posterior tibial translation was the primary outcome measure. Compared with the intact knee, double-bundle-equivalent reconstruction under external tibial torque allowed greater posterior translation across the flexion arc as a whole (P=.025) and at 30 degrees flexion (P=.027) when results were stratified by flexion angle. No other kinematic differences were found with single-bundle or double-bundle-equivalent fixation, including mediolateral translation and both coupled and isolated tibial rotation (P>.05). Single-bundle PCL reconstruction closely approximated native knee rotational and translational kinematics, whereas double-bundle-equivalent reconstruction permitted increased posterior translation with applied external tibial torque, particularly at lower flexion angles. Single-bundle PCL reconstruction provides knee stability similar to the intact condition, making it a practical alternative to conventional double-bundle PCL reconstruction. The authors found that double-bundle-equivalent reconstruction provided no advantage to justify its clinical use.
引用
收藏
页码:9 / 16
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Femoral fixation of hamstring grafts in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Biomechanical evaluation of different fixation techniques - Is there an acutle angle effect?
    Niedzwietzki, Patricia
    Zantop, Thore
    Weimann, Andre
    Herbort, Mirco
    Raschke, Michael J.
    Petersen, Wolf
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2007, 35 (05): : 780 - 786
  • [2] Cross-pin femoral fixation for hamstring posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
    In, Y
    Bahk, WJ
    Kwon, OS
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2004, 20 (04): : E29 - E33
  • [3] Biomechanical properties of femoral posterior cruciate ligament fixations
    M. Ettinger
    M. Petri
    K. T. Haag
    S. Brand
    A. Dratzidis
    C. Hurschler
    C. Krettek
    M. Jagodzinski
    Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2014, 22 : 2040 - 2047
  • [4] Biomechanical properties of femoral posterior cruciate ligament fixations
    Ettinger, M.
    Petri, M.
    Haag, K. T.
    Brand, S.
    Dratzidis, A.
    Hurschler, C.
    Krettek, C.
    Jagodzinski, M.
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2014, 22 (09) : 2040 - 2047
  • [5] Onlay Reconstruction of the Posterior Cruciate Ligament: Biomechanical Comparison of Unicortical and Bicortical Tibial Fixation
    de Albuquerque, Joao Bourbon, II
    Pfeiffer, Ferris
    Stannard, James P.
    Cook, James L.
    Kfuri, Mauricio
    JOURNAL OF KNEE SURGERY, 2019, 32 (10) : 972 - 978
  • [6] Biomechanical analysis of a double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
    Harner, CD
    Janaushek, MA
    Kanamori, A
    Yagi, M
    Vogrin, TM
    Woo, SLY
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2000, 28 (02): : 144 - 151
  • [7] A biomechanical comparison of posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques
    Bergfeld, JA
    McAllister, DR
    Parker, RD
    Valdevit, ADC
    Kambic, HE
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2001, 29 (02): : 129 - 136
  • [8] Biomechanical Evaluation of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Femoral Fixation Techniques
    Kleweno, Conor P.
    Jacir, Alberto M.
    Gardner, Thomas R.
    Ahmad, Christopher S.
    Levine, William N.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2009, 37 (02): : 339 - 345
  • [9] Reducing the "killer turn" in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by fixation level and smoothing the tibial aperture
    Weimann, Andre
    Wolfert, Alexandra
    Zantop, Thore
    Eggers, Anne-Kathleen
    Raschke, Michael
    Petersen, Wolf
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2007, 23 (10): : 1104 - 1111
  • [10] Biomechanical analysis of the anterior cruciate ligament fixation
    Rodriguez, C.
    Maestro, A.
    Garcia, T. E.
    Lombardia, A.
    TRAUMA-SPAIN, 2010, 21 (03): : 150 - 155