Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel Loop Retention Mechanism for Cortical Graft Fixation in ACL Reconstruction
- PMID: 32133387
- PMCID: PMC7042561
- DOI: 10.1177/2325967120904322
Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel Loop Retention Mechanism for Cortical Graft Fixation in ACL Reconstruction
Abstract
Background: Implant fixation by means of a cortical fixation device (CFD) has become a routine procedure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. There is no clear consensus whether adjustable-length CFDs are more susceptible to loop lengthening when compared with pretied fixed-length CFDs.
Purpose: To assess biomechanical performance measures of 3 types of CFDs when subjected to various loading protocols.
Study design: Controlled laboratory study.
Methods: Three types of CFDs underwent biomechanical testing: 1 fixed length and 2 adjustable length. One of the adjustable-length devices is based on the so-called finger trap mechanism, and the other is based on a modified sling lock mechanism. A device-only test of 5000 cycles (n = 8 per group) and a tendon-device test of 1000 cycles (n = 8 per group) with lower and upper force limits of 50 and 250 N, respectively, were applied, followed by ramp-to-failure testing. Adjustable-length devices then underwent further cyclic testing with complete loop unloading (n = 5 per group) at each cycle, as well as fatigue testing (n = 3 per group) over a total of 1 million cycles. Derived mechanical parameters were compared among the devices for statistical significance using Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance followed by post hoc Mann-Whitney U testing with Bonferroni correction.
Results: All CFDs showed elongation <2 mm after 5000 cycles when tested in an isolated manner and withstood ultimate tensile forces in excess of estimated peak in vivo forces. In both device-only and tendon-device tests, differences in cyclic performance were found among the devices, favoring adjustable-length fixation devices over the fixed-length device. Completely unloading the suspension loops, however, led to excessive loop lengthening of the finger trap device, whereas the modified sling lock device remained stable throughout the test. The fixed-length device displayed superior ultimate strength over both adjustable-length devices. Both adjustable-length devices showed adequate fatigue behavior during high-cyclic testing.
Conclusion: All tested devices successfully prevented critical construct elongation when tested with constant tension and withstood ultimate loads in excess of estimated in vivo forces during the rehabilitation phase. The finger trap device gradually lengthened excessively when completely unloaded during cyclic testing.
Clinical relevance: Critical loop lengthening may occur if adjustable-length devices based on the finger trap mechanism are repeatedly unloaded in situ.
Keywords: ACL reconstruction; adjustable button; biomechanical testing; cortical fixation; cyclic loading.
© The Author(s) 2020.
Conflict of interest statement
One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: T.G., X.L., E.B., and J.G.S. are coinventors of a patent on the tested sling mechanism, filed by ZuriMED Technologies. X.L. and E.B. are employed by ZuriMED Technologies. X.L., E.B., and J.G.S. are shareholders in ZuriMED Technologies. S.F.F. is a consultant for Medacta. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.
Figures






Similar articles
-
Biomechanical Stability of Third-Generation Adjustable Suture Loop Devices Versus Continuous Loop Button Device for Cortical Fixation of ACL Tendon Grafts.Orthop J Sports Med. 2024 Apr 3;12(4):23259671241240375. doi: 10.1177/23259671241240375. eCollection 2024 Apr. Orthop J Sports Med. 2024. PMID: 38576875 Free PMC article.
-
Femoral suspension devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: do adjustable loops lengthen?Am J Sports Med. 2014 Feb;42(2):343-9. doi: 10.1177/0363546513507769. Epub 2013 Oct 24. Am J Sports Med. 2014. PMID: 24158183
-
Adjustable buttons for ACL graft cortical fixation partially fail with cyclic loading and unloading.Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019 Aug;27(8):2530-2536. doi: 10.1007/s00167-018-5262-2. Epub 2018 Oct 27. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019. PMID: 30368561
-
Fixed- Versus Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biomechanical Studies.Orthop J Sports Med. 2018 Oct 19;6(10):2325967118801762. doi: 10.1177/2325967118801762. eCollection 2018 Oct. Orthop J Sports Med. 2018. PMID: 30364394 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Adjustable Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.Indian J Orthop. 2020 Jan 13;54(4):426-443. doi: 10.1007/s43465-019-00022-4. eCollection 2020 Jul. Indian J Orthop. 2020. PMID: 32549958 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Biomechanical Stability of Third-Generation Adjustable Suture Loop Devices Versus Continuous Loop Button Device for Cortical Fixation of ACL Tendon Grafts.Orthop J Sports Med. 2024 Apr 3;12(4):23259671241240375. doi: 10.1177/23259671241240375. eCollection 2024 Apr. Orthop J Sports Med. 2024. PMID: 38576875 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of Tibial Fixation Devices for Quadrupled Hamstring ACL Reconstruction.Orthop J Sports Med. 2022 May 11;10(5):23259671221096107. doi: 10.1177/23259671221096107. eCollection 2022 May. Orthop J Sports Med. 2022. PMID: 35592018 Free PMC article.
-
Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Adjustable-Loop Suspensory Devices for All-Inside ACL Reconstruction: A Time-Zero Full-Construct Model.Orthop J Sports Med. 2023 Sep 29;11(9):23259671231201461. doi: 10.1177/23259671231201461. eCollection 2023 Sep. Orthop J Sports Med. 2023. PMID: 37786476 Free PMC article.
-
Randomized comparative study of suspension femoral fixation device in graft position maintenance in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: EndoButton CL vs TightRope RT.Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol. 2021 Jun 1;25:42-46. doi: 10.1016/j.asmart.2021.05.007. eCollection 2021 Jul. Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol. 2021. PMID: 34141595 Free PMC article.
-
Risk for Revision ACLR After Primary All-Inside Quadrupled Semitendinosus Hamstring Tendon Autograft ACLR With Independent Suture Tape Augmentation: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Orthop J Sports Med. 2024 Sep 26;12(9):23259671241270308. doi: 10.1177/23259671241270308. eCollection 2024 Sep. Orthop J Sports Med. 2024. PMID: 39372233 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Ahmad SS, Hirschmann MT, Voumard B, et al. Adjustable loop ACL suspension devices demonstrate less reliability in terms of reproducibility and irreversible displacement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(5):1392–1398. - PubMed
-
- Barrow AE, Pilia M, Guda T, Kadrmas WR, Burns TC. Femoral suspension devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: do adjustable loops lengthen? Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(2):343–349. - PubMed
-
- Benea H, d’Astorg H, Klouche S, Bauer T, Tomoaia G, Hardy P. Pain evaluation after all-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and short term functional results of a prospective randomized study. Knee. 2014;21(1):102–106. - PubMed
-
- Boyle MJ, Vovos TJ, Walker CG, Stabile KJ, Roth JM, Garrett WE. Does adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspension loosen after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A retrospective comparative study. Knee. 2015;22(4):304–308. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous