Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Feb;20(2):308-14.
doi: 10.1007/s00167-011-1584-z. Epub 2011 Jun 22.

The fixation strength of tibial PCL press-fit reconstructions

Affiliations
Comparative Study

The fixation strength of tibial PCL press-fit reconstructions

M Ettinger et al. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: A secure tibial press-fit technique in posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions is an interesting technique because no hardware is necessary. For anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, a few press-fit procedures have been published. Up to the present point, no biomechanical data exist for a tibial press-fit posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to characterize a press-fit procedure for PCL reconstruction that is biomechanically equivalent to an interference screw fixation.

Methods: Quadriceps and hamstring tendons of 20 human cadavers (age: 49.2 ± 18.5 years) were used. A press-fit fixation with a knot in the semitendinosus tendon (K) and a quadriceps tendon bone block graft (Q) were compared to an interference screw fixation (I) in 30 porcine femora. In each group, nine constructs were cyclically stretched and then loaded until failure. Maximum load to failure, stiffness, and elongation during failure testing and cyclical loading were investigated.

Results: The maximum load to failure was 518 ± 157 N (387-650 N) for the (K) group, 558 ± 119 N (466-650 N) for the (I) group, and 620 ± 102 N (541-699 N) for the (Q) group. The stiffness was 55 ± 27 N/mm (18-89 N/mm) for the (K) group, 117 ± 62 N/mm (69-165 N/mm) for the (I) group, and 65 ± 21 N/mm (49-82 N/mm) for the (Q) group. The stiffness of the (I) group was significantly larger (P = 0.01). The elongation during cyclical loading was significantly larger for all groups from the 1st to the 5th cycle compared to the elongation in between the 5th to the 20th cycle (P < 0.03).

Conclusion: All techniques exhibited larger elongation during initial loading. Load to failure and stiffness was significantly different between the fixations. The Q fixation showed equal biomechanical properties compared to a pure tendon fixation (I) with an interference screw. All three fixation techniques that were investigated exhibit comparable biomechanical properties. Preconditioning of the constructs is critical. Clinical trials have to investigate the biological effectiveness of these fixation techniques.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Arthroscopy. 1997 Apr;13(2):229-32 - PubMed
    1. Am J Sports Med. 1987 May-Jun;15(3):225-9 - PubMed
    1. Arthroscopy. 2009 Mar;25(3):250-6 - PubMed
    1. Am J Sports Med. 2005 Jul;33(7):976-81 - PubMed
    1. Am J Sports Med. 2003 Mar-Apr;31(2):174-81 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources