Search

Abstract Background Surgical parameters such as the selection of tibial and femoral attachment site, graft tension, and knee flexion angle at the time of fixation may influence the control of knee stability after lateral extra-articular reconstruction. This study aimed to determine how sensitive is the control of knee rotation and translation, during simulated pivot-shift scenarios, to these four surgery settings. Methods A computer model was used to simulate 625 lateral extra-articular reconstructions based upon five different variations of each of the following parameters: femoral and tibial attachment sites, knee flexion angle and graft tension at the time of fixation. For each simulated surgery, the lateral extra-articular reconstruction external rotation moment at the knee joint center was computed during simulated pivot-shift scenarios. The sensitivity of the control of knee rotation and translation to a given surgery setting was assessed by calculating the coefficient of variation of the lateral extra-articular reconstruction external rotation moment. Findings Graft tension had minimal influence on the control of knee rotation and translation with less than 2.4% of variation across the scenarios tested. Control of knee rotation and translation was the least affected by the femoral attachment site if the knee was close to full extension at the time of graft fixation. The choice of the tibial attachment site was crucial when the femoral fixation was proximal and posterior to the femoral epicondyle since 15 to 67% of variation was observed in the control of knee rotation and translation. Interpretation Femoral and tibial attachment sites as well as knee flexion angle at the time of fixation should be considered by surgeons when performing lateral extra-articular reconstruction. Variation in graft tension between the ranges 20–40 N has minimal influence on the control of knee rotation and translation. Highlights • Computer model was built to simulate several ACL surgeries with lateral tenodesis. • Sensitivity of the control of knee stability to four surgery settings was computed. • Whatever the surgical procedure, knee flexion influenced knee rotation control. • Knee femoral/tibial attachment site should be considered by surgeons. • Graft tension at surgery barely influenced control of knee rotation and translation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most common knee injuries is the Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) rupture with severe implications on knee stability. The usual treatment is the ACL Reconstruction (ACLR) surgery where the surgeon replaces the torn ligament with a graft in an effort to restore knee kinematics. In case of excessive rotatory instability, Lateral Extra—Articular Tenodesis (LET) can be performed in combination with ACLR. Additionally, LET appears to reduce ACLR graft forces minimizing graft failure chances. However, there are concerns about overconstraining physiological rotation. To gain insight in this controversial topic, we developed an automatic, open-source tool to create a series of Finite Element (FE) models attempting to investigate the interactions of ACLR and LET through simulation. We started by creating a validated model of the healthy knee joint that served as reference for subsequent FE simulations. Then, we created FE models of standalone ACLR and combined ACLR—LET. Each model was assessed by applying a loading profile that resembles the reduction phase of the Pivot—Shift clinical exam. We measured the External Tibia Rotation (ETR), the Posterior Tibia Translation (PTT) of the lateral tibial compartment, and the ACLR graft stress developed around the femoral tunnel insertion site. We observed the following: a) LET reduces ETR and PTT compared to isolated ACLR, b) combined ACLR—LET is more sensitive to LET graft pretension with lower values showcasing performance closer to the healthy joint, c) LET reduces ACLR graft forces for the same pretension values, d) LET exhibits significant overconstraint for higher pretension values. In general, these findings are in agreement with relevant clinical studies and accentuate the potential of the developed framework as a tool that can assist orthopaedists during surgery planning. We provide open access for the FE models of this study to enhance research transparency, reproducibility and extensibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The redislocation rate of conservatively treated patella instability is high. One of the leading surgical strategies is medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. Over-tensioning is one of the most challenging complications in static medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction as the graft used for reconstruction is isometric and the anatomical MPFL is a mostly dynamic structure. As an alternative to established static reconstruction techniques, dynamic graft techniques have been introduced for stabilizing the patella with the aim of providing a more physiological reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament. To date, data on clinical outcomes are scarce and on biomechanical outcomes of the dynamic MPFL reconstruction are lacking. Here, we present the protocol of a randomized clinical trial for comparing clinical and biomechanical outcomes of dynamic versus static medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. Methods: This study is a prospective, single blinded, randomized, multicenter, multimodal (clinical and biomechanical) clinical trial. Patients with recurrent patella dislocation requiring isolated MPFL reconstruction will be recruited and randomized to the dynamic or static reconstruction technique. Participants will be followed up for 2 years with a total of five follow-ups. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, upright radiographs, surgical reports and patient records will be evaluated, and clinical and functional outcomes will be measured. Patient-reported knee function and anterior knee pain as assessed with the Kujala score will serve as primary outcome. For biomechanical outcome, pre- and postoperative evaluations will be performed to assess isokinetic muscle strength, gait asymmetry, joint kinematics and kinetics, and timing of muscle activity. Discussion: The results of the study will clarify whether the reported surgery success for patella stabilization via dynamic MPFL reconstruction is due to muscle contraction or to the passive tenodesis effect combined with clinical outcome measures. With this study, we will provide much needed information on knee biomechanics after dynamic versus static MPFL reconstruction to provide evidence to support orthopedic surgeons in evidence-based decision-making in their quest for surgical techniques most favorable for their patients. Trial registration The study protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04849130). Registered 19 April 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04849130. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Precise pre-tensioning protocol of the graft has not been determined in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The aims of this study are to measure the human autologous graft elongation, and to reveal what portion of the graft elongated greater after pre-tensioning in ACL reconstruction.Methods: Twenty-four hamstring tendon grafts which were harvested from patients were included. A continuous load of 150 N was applied to the graft twice for 30 seconds each (150 N-1 minute), and the same loading was repeatedly applied (150 N-2 minute). The amount of elongation of the tendon portion (Length T) and the stitched portion (Length S) were measured after each pre-tensioning.Results: Length S gradually increased by 1.57 ± 0.67 mm after the 150 N-1 minute pre-tensioning and by 2.12 ± 0.76 mm after the 150 N-2 minute pre-tensioning, respectively. Length T was not significantly elongated after 150 N-1 min (p = 0.66) and 150 N-2 min (p = 0.59).Conclusions: Graft elongation of the approximately 2 mm was observed, particularly in the stitched portion. It is necessary for a surgeon to focus on careful removal of slack from each stitch during suturing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate knee kinematics during double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (DB-PCLR) intraoperatively using a navigation system, and especially assess biomechanical behaviour of the anterolateral bundle (ALB) and posteromedial bundle (PMB) graft in DB-PCLR. Also, clinical results of minimum 2-year follow-up were investigated.Methods: Nine patients received DB-PCLR with hamstring graft. Before reconstruction, knee laxities, including posterior tibial translation (PTT) in neutral rotation at 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75° and 90° of knee flexion, were measured using a kinematic-based navigation system. After the PMB or ALB was temporally fixed, the knee laxities were measured in the same manner. Each patient was evaluated pre- and post-operatively with side-to-side difference of tibial position in gravity sag view and Lysholm score.Results: Both ALB and PMB fixation restrained the PTT compared to  PCL deficiency throughout all knee flexion angles. At 90° of knee flexion, ALB fixation significantly decreased PTT compare to PMB fixation (p = 0.014) and DB-PCLR significantly decreased PTT compare to ALB fixation (p = 0.045). The mean side-to-side difference of tibial position in gravity sag view was 12.0 ± 1.7 mm preoperatively and 2.3 ± 1.8 mm at final follow-up, and the mean Lysholm scores were 68.9 ± 20.9 and 96.3 ± 2.9, respectively.Conclusions: There were no significant differences in the PTT between ALB and PMB fixations at 0° to 75° of knee flexion, and both ALB and PMB reconstructions are important for restraining PTT. At 90° of knee flexion, the ALB grafts may be more important to control PTT compared to PMB grafts; however, neither single-bundle reconstruction with ALB nor PMB could function as DB-PCLR did. In addition, PTT after DB-PCLR was strongly correlated side-to-side difference in posterior sag view at the final follow-up. The results from this study indicated that both ALB and PMB are important to stabilize PCL-deficient knees.Level Of Evidence: Therapeutic study, Level III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aimed to find answers to the following questions: (1) Is it possible to determine and measure the space between the top of the graft and entrance of implant tunnel by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)? (2) Is there any correlation between the hole above the graft in femoral tunnel and the femoral tunnel widening? (3) Does the tunnel widening affect clinical outcomes? (4) Are clinical and radiological outcomes of Toggle Loc with Zip Loop implant-loop design better than Endobutton CL? Methods: The operative data of two surgeons were analysed. One surgeon used Endobutton CL femoral fixation (E-CL group, n = 46); the other used Toggle Loc with Zip Loop femoral fixation (TL-ZL group, n = 32). At the last follow-up, clinical evaluation was performed with International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC), Tegner activity scale, Lysholm score, active and passive ROM, Lachman and pivot shift tests, and KT-1000 arthrometer. Radiological evaluation including measurement of tunnel widening on X-ray and MRI and the height of attic of femoral tunnel (space above the graft in femoral tunnel) on MRI was performed. Results: No difference was found in patient demographics, concomitant meniscal surgery and clinical outcomes. The femoral tunnel widening was evaluated significantly low in TL-ZL group on the PA X-ray and MRI. No difference was observed in the tibial tunnel widening on X-ray and MRI. A correlation between the height of attic of femoral tunnel and the femoral tunnel widening was determined. Thus, the greater the height of attic of femoral tunnel, the greater the femoral tunnel widening. No correlation was established between the tunnel widening and IKDC and Lysholm scores. Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate that a positive correlation exists between the height of the attic of the femoral tunnel and femoral tunnel widening. Therefore, increasing the height of the attic of the femoral tunnel may contribute to graft motion, which would then enhance femoral tunnel widening. Level of evidence: III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: No previous description has been made about an objective method to test the graft resistance in MPFL reconstruction intraoperatively. In our study, we aimed to obtain intraoperative objective data about the graft resistance using contact pressure-sensitive surfaces and measuring pressure formed under the graft. Materials and methods: In 2012, double-layered contact pressure-sensitive Fuji Prescale Film bands were placed under MPFL in 15 fresh-frozen high above-knee amputates (Group 1) and under graft in 10 patients who underwent MPFL reconstruction (Group 2). Measured values at different flexion angles were compared between and in groups. Results: Statistical analysis was performed by Student’s t test. It has been found that the pressure under the graft was higher in patients having reconstruction as compared to the pressure under natural MPFL. Decreasing pressure values were observed with increasing flexion angles in both groups. Conclusion: Contact pressure-sensitive surfaces provided objective data when placed under the graft in natural MPFL and during surgery. Therefore, they may be used as an objective marker providing information about graft resistance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many medical devices that are implanted in the body use wires or wireless radiofrequency telemetry to communicate with circuitry outside the body. However, the wires are a common source of surgical complications, including breakage, infection and electrical noise. In addition, radiofrequency telemetry requires large amounts of power and results in low-efficiency transmission through biological tissue. As an alternative, the conductive properties of the body can be used to enable wireless communication with implanted devices. In this article, several methods of intrabody communication are described and compared. In addition to reducing the complications that occur with current implantable medical devices, intrabody communication can enable novel types of miniature devices for research and clinical applications. INSET: Key issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several trials have been conducted to compare the clinical results between anatomic double-bundle and single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction procedures. In these studies, however, the number of patients was insufficient to compare the clinical results of the 2 procedures. Hypothesis: The anatomic double-bundle procedure may be significantly better concerning the anterior laxity and the pivot-shift test than the single-bundle procedure, while there may be no significant differences in the other clinical evaluations and the intraoperative and postoperative complications between the 2 procedures. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Three hundred and twenty-eight patients with unilateral ACL reconstruction using hamstring autografts were divided into 2 groups. The first 157 consecutive patients underwent single-bundle reconstruction and the remaining 171 patients underwent anatomic double-bundle reconstruction. Concerning all background factors, there were no statistical differences between the 2 groups. Each patient was examined 2 years after surgery. Results: No serious complications were experienced in either group. The anterior laxity was significantly less in the double-bundle reconstruction (mean, 1.2 mm) than in the single-bundle reconstruction (mean, 2.5 mm). In the pivot-shift test, the double bundle (+ indication, 16%; ++, 3%) was significantly better than the single bundle (+ result, 37%; ++, 12%). The mean Lysholm score averaged 96.5 points and 97.3 points in single-bundle and double-bundle reconstructions, respectively, while the International Knee Documentation Committee evaluation showed that 90 and 110 patients, respectively, were evaluated as rank A (no significant difference between groups). There were no significant differences in the other clinical evaluations and the complications between the 2 procedures. Conclusions: The postoperative anterior and rotational stability after the anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction was significantly better than that after the single-bundle reconstruction, although there were no significant differences between the 2 procedures concerning the complications and the clinical evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]