Biomechanical comparison of four coupled fixation systems for ACL reconstruction with bone socket or full-tunnel on the tibial side.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To compare in an animal model the biomechanical properties of four coupled fixation devices currently used in ACL reconstruction. Three out of four devices used a full tibial tunnel with an interference screw, while the other one system used a tibial socket and an adjustable loop suspension device. The null hypothesis is that there are no biomechanical differences between all the techniques tested. METHODS: Thirty two femur-graft-tibia complexes were mounted on a tensile machine using bovine digital extensor tendons, porcine knees and four different fixation device combinations: After a preconditioning with a tensile load of 90N for five minutes, 1000cycles between 0 and 150N were applied to the complex before the final pulled to failure. Stiffness and strength were evaluated at the final pullout, as was the displacement (slippage) at one, 100, 500, and 1000cycles. RESULTS: The multiple mean comparison led to a significant difference for the case of stiffness, with worse results in group C compared to group A (p=0.037). Conversely, no differences were found in UFL and slippage between all groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: All the tested systems demonstrated in an animal model sufficient properties for a safe postoperative rehabilitation both for strength and for stiffness and slippage under cyclic loading.