Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2022; 35(05): 539-547
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1716371
Original Article

Effect of Geometry on the Fixation Strength of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using BASHTI Technique

Hadi Moeinnia
1   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
,
Amir Nourani
1   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
,
Amirhossein Borjali
1   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
,
Mahdi Mohseni
1   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
,
Narges Ghias
1   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
,
Hossein Korani
1   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
,
Mahmoud Chizari
2   Department of Engineering and Technology, School of Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The goal of this study is to investigate the effects of tendon and cannulated drill bit diameter on the strength of the bone and site hold tendon inside (BASHTI) fixation technique for an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Bovine digital tendons and Sawbones blocks were used to mimic the ACL reconstruction. Mechanical strength of the specimens was measured using a cyclic loading continued by a single cycle pullout load until failure to simulate the real postsurgical loading conditions. Finally, failure modes of specimens and ultimate failure load were recorded. The maximum possible tendon surface strain (i.e., tendon compression [TC]) for tendon diameters of 6, 7, 8, and 9 mm were 0.73, 0.8, 0.7, and 0.65, respectively. Eighty per cent of the specimens with tendon diameter of 6 mm and 20% of specimens with tendon diameter of 7 mm failed on the torn tendon. All samples with larger tendon diameters (i.e., 8 and 9 mm) failed on the fixation slippage. The maximum fixation strength according to the most suitable core bones for 6, 7, 8, and 9 mm tendons were 148 ± 47 N (core 9.5 mm), 258 ± 66 N (core 9.5 mm), 386 ± 128 N (core 8.5 mm), and 348 ± 146 N (core 8.5 mm), respectively. The mode of tendon failure was significantly influenced by the tendon diameter. Also, an increase in TC raised the fixation strength for all tendon diameters; however, tendon over compression decreased the fixation strength for the 8 mm tendon group. Finally, an empirical equation was proposed to predict BASHTI fixation strength.

Keywords

BASHTI technique - geometrical parameters - ACL reconstruction - fixation strength - core bone

Note

This research was performed at Biomechanics Laboratory, Sharif University of Technology.


Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving animals were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted. These tests were approved by Sharif Ethics Committee with 45784 permit number. Each author certifies that his or her institution approved the animal protocol for this investigation and that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


Authors' Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Hadi Moeinnia, Amirhossein Borjali, Mahdi Mohseni, Narges Ghias, and Hossei Korani. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Hadi Moeinnia and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.




Publication History

Received: 23 January 2020

Accepted: 21 July 2020

Article published online:
08 September 2020

© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Abram SGF, Price AJ, Judge A, Beard DJ. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and meniscal repair rates have both increased in the past 20 years in England: hospital statistics from 1997 to 2017. Br J Sports Med 2020; 54 (05) 286-291
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Sanders TL, Pareek A, Hewett TE. et al. Long-term rate of graft failure after ACL reconstruction: a geographic population cohort analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (01) 222-228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Abram SGF, Judge A, Beard DJ, Price AJ. Rates of adverse outcomes and revision surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a study of 104,255 procedures using the National Hospital Episode Statistics Database for England, UK. Am J Sports Med 2019; 47 (11) 2533-2542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Carulli C, Matassi F, Soderi S, Sirleo L, Munz G, Innocenti M. Resorbable screw and sheath versus resorbable interference screw and staples for ACL reconstruction: a comparison of two tibial fixation methods. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (04) 1264-1271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Weimann A, Rodieck M, Zantop T, Hassenpflug J, Petersen W. Primary stability of hamstring graft fixation with biodegradable suspension versus interference screws. Arthroscopy 2005; 21 (03) 266-274
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Pereira H, Correlo VM, Silva-Correia J, Oliveira JM, Reis RL, Espregueira-Mendes J. Migration of “bioabsorbable” screws in ACL repair. How much do we know? A systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013; 21 (04) 986-994
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dujardin J, Vandenneucker H, Bellemans J. Tibial cyst and intra-articular granuloma formation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using polylactide carbonate osteoconductive interference screws. Arthroscopy 2008; 24 (02) 238-242
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Busfield BT, Anderson LJ. Sterile pretibial abscess after anterior cruciate reconstruction from bioabsorbable interference screws: a report of 2 cases. Arthroscopy 2007; 23 (08) 911.e1-911.e4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Barber FA. Pullout strength of bone-patellar tendon-bone allograft bone plugs: a comparison of cadaver tibia and rigid polyurethane foam. Arthroscopy 2013; 29 (09) 1546-1551
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Hertel P, Behrend H. Implant-free anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the patella ligament and press-fit double bundle technique [in German]. Unfallchirurg 2010; 113 (07) 540-548
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Malek MM, DeLuca JV, Verch DL, Kunkle KL. Arthroscopically assisted ACL reconstruction using central third patellar tendon autograft with press fit femoral fixation. Instr Course Lect 1996; 45: 287-295
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Felmet G, Soni A, Becker R, Musahl V. Press-fit ACL reconstruction. In: Controversies in the Technical Aspects of ACL Reconstruction. Springer; 2017: 247-261
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Boszotta H, Anderl W. Primary stability with tibial press-fit fixation of patellar ligament graft: an experimental study in ovine knees. Arthroscopy 2001; 17 (09) 963-970
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Arnold MP, Burger LD, Wirz D, Goepfert B, Hirschmann MT. The biomechanical strength of a hardware-free femoral press-fit method for ACL bone-tendon-bone graft fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (04) 1234-1240
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Biazzo A, Manzotti A, Motavalli K, Confalonieri N. Femoral press-fit fixation versus interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft: 20-year follow-up. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2018; 9 (02) 116-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Boszotta H. Arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a patellar tendon graft in press-fit technique: surgical technique and follow-up. Arthroscopy 1997; 13 (03) 332-339
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Barié A, Köpf M, Jaber A. et al. Long-term follow-up after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a press-fit quadriceps tendon-patellar bone autograft. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2018; 19 (01) 368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Bashti K, Tahmasebi MN, Kaseb H, Farahmand F, Akbar M, Mobini A. Biomechanical comparison between BASHTI bone plug technique and biodegradable screw for fixation of grafts in ligament surgery. Arch Bone Jt Surg 2015; 3 (01) 29-34
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Prentice HA, Lind M, Mouton C. et al. Patient demographic and surgical characteristics in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a description of registries from six countries. Br J Sports Med 2018; 52 (11) 716-722
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Dehestani P. Experimental investigation of bone density on fixation strength of graft using bashti bone plug technique and comparison with Interference screw in ACL reconstruction surgery [Master's dissertation]. Tehran, IR: Sharif University of Technology; 2015
    PubMed
  • 21 Borjali A, Farrahi G, Jafarzade H, Chizari M. Experimental study of a sheathed core bone plug in BASHTI ACL reconstructive method. The 27th Annual International Conference of Iranian Society of Mechanical Engineers - ISME 2019, Tehran, Iran; April 30–May 2, 2019
    PubMed
  • 22 Nourani A, Mohseni M, Korani H, Ghias N, Chizari M. Reconstruction of a long head biceps using BASHTI method; comparison between two different insertion techniques insertion techniques. The 27th Annual International Conference of Iranian Society of Mechanical Engineers – ISME 2019, Tehran, Iran; April 30–May 2, 2019
    PubMed
  • 23 Beynnon BD, Amis AA. In vitro testing protocols for the cruciate ligaments and ligament reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1998; 6 (Suppl. 01) S70-S76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Figueroa F, Figueroa D, Espregueira-Mendes J. Hamstring autograft size importance in anterior cruciate ligament repair surgery. EFORT Open Rev 2018; 3 (03) 93-97
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Siebold R, Kiss ZS, Morris HG. Effect of compaction drilling during ACL reconstruction with hamstrings on postoperative tunnel widening. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2008; 128 (05) 461-468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Aga C, Rasmussen MT, Smith SD. et al. Biomechanical comparison of interference screws and combination screw and sheath devices for soft tissue anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on the tibial side. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41 (04) 841-848
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kousa P, Järvinen TLN, Vihavainen M, Kannus P, Järvinen M. The fixation strength of six hamstring tendon graft fixation devices in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Part I: femoral site. Am J Sports Med 2003; 31 (02) 174-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Markolf KL, Gorek JF, Kabo JM, Shapiro MS. Direct measurement of resultant forces in the anterior cruciate ligament. An in vitro study performed with a new experimental technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990; 72 (04) 557-567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Lawley RJ, Klein SE, Chudik SC. Reverse anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction fixation: a biomechanical comparison study of tibial cross-pin and femoral interference screw fixation. Arthroscopy 2017; 33 (03) 625-632
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Chizari M, Wang B, Barrett M, Snow M. Biomechanical testing procedures in tendon graft reconstructive ACL surgery. Biomed Eng (Singapore) 2010; 22 (05) 427-436
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Belbasis A, Fuss FK, Sidhu J. Estimation of cruciate ligament forces via smart compression garments. Procedia Eng 2015; 112: 169-174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Lim BO, Shin HS, Lee YS. Biomechanical comparison of rotational activities between anterior cruciate ligament- and posterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015; 23 (04) 1231-1238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Eichinger M, Schmoelz W, Attal R. et al. Screw oversizing for anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation in primary and enlarged tibial tunnels: a biomechanical study in a porcine model. Knee 2018; 25 (05) 774-781
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar