CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2019; 54(02): 183-189
DOI: 10.1016/j.rbo.2017.09.001
Original Article | Artigo Original
Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Biomechanical Evaluation of Different Tibial Fixation Methods in the Reconstruction of the Anterolateral Ligament in Swine Bones[*]

Article in several languages: português | English
Rogério Nascimento Costa
1  Serviço de Cirurgia do Joelho, Hospital São Vicente de Paulo, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil
,
Rubens Rosso Nadal
1  Serviço de Cirurgia do Joelho, Hospital São Vicente de Paulo, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil
,
Paulo Renato Fernandes Saggin
1  Serviço de Cirurgia do Joelho, Hospital São Vicente de Paulo, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil
,
Osmar Valadão Lopes Junior
1  Serviço de Cirurgia do Joelho, Hospital São Vicente de Paulo, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil
,
Leandro de Freitas Spinelli
2  Laboratório de Bioengenharia, Biomecânica e Biomateriais, Universidade de Passo Fundo, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil
,
Charles Leonardo Israel
2  Laboratório de Bioengenharia, Biomecânica e Biomateriais, Universidade de Passo Fundo, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

06 July 2017

21 September 2017

Publication Date:
10 May 2019 (online)

Abstract

Objective The present study aims to evaluate different methods of tibial fixation in the reconstruction of the anterolateral ligament (ALL). In addition, the present paper aims to compare the effectiveness of these methods and their mechanisms of failure in swine knees.

Methods A total of 40 freshly frozen swine limbs were divided into 4 groups of 10 specimens, according to the tibial fixation technique used. In group A, the tibial fixation of the tendon graft was made through an anchor passing the graft. In group B, the tibial fixation was performed through a metal interference screw in a single bone tunnel. In group C, the tibial fixation included an anchor associated with a tendinous suture (but not with a wire crossing the tendon). In group D, two confluent bony tunnels were drilled and combined with an interference screw in one of them.

Results The lowest mean force (70.56 N) was observed in group A, and the highest mean force (244.85 N) was observed in group B; the mean values in the other 2 groups ranged from 171.68 N (group C) to 149.43 N (group D). Considering the margin of error (5%), there was a significant difference between the groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusion Fixation with an interference screw in a single tunnel bone showed the highest tensile strength among the evaluated techniques.

* Work developed at the Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia of Passo Fundo, RS, Brazil