Biomechanical evaluation of posterolateral corner reconstruction with suture augmentation in a posterolateral corner and posterior cruciate ligament deficient knee model

IF 1.4 3区 医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Ajith Malige , Andrew Carbone , Dave T. Huang , Shrey Kanjiya , Omar Rahman , Michael Banffy , Melodie F. Metzger
{"title":"Biomechanical evaluation of posterolateral corner reconstruction with suture augmentation in a posterolateral corner and posterior cruciate ligament deficient knee model","authors":"Ajith Malige ,&nbsp;Andrew Carbone ,&nbsp;Dave T. Huang ,&nbsp;Shrey Kanjiya ,&nbsp;Omar Rahman ,&nbsp;Michael Banffy ,&nbsp;Melodie F. Metzger","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2025.106461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Posterolateral corner injuries are relatively uncommon but difficult to successfully treat. This study evaluates the biomechanical stability of a novel reconstruction technique utilizing suture augmentation and compare it to the traditional LaPrade technique.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Eight matched pairs of all-male cadaveric knees were divided into two groups: (1) Posterolateral corner reconstruction and (2) reconstruction with suture augmentation. Each knee was tested in 3 states sequentially in isolation: (1) intact, (2) deficient posterolateral corner+Posterior cruciate ligament, and (3) after posterolateral corner reconstruction or reconstruction with suture augmentation. Each knee was repeatedly tested by applying a 134 N posterior load, 10 Nm varus moment, and 5 Nm of external rotary moment at 0, 30, 60, and 90 degrees of flexion while rotation and displacement of the tibia relative to the femur were recorded.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Both reconstruction techniques restored posterior tibial displacement to levels that were less than the deficient state (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.01) but greater than intact knees (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). Suture augmentation recorded less posterior displacement compared to reconstruction alone (30<sup>o</sup> = −1.2 mm, 60<sup>o</sup> = −1.0 mm, 90<sup>o</sup> = −0.6, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01). Both techniques restored varus stability to intact levels at all flexion angles except at 90<sup>o</sup>. Suture augmentation allowed external rotation closer to intact values compared to reconstruction alone at all angles (0<sup>o</sup> = −3.7<sup>o</sup>, 30<sup>o</sup> = −4.8<sup>o</sup>, 60<sup>o</sup> = −6.0<sup>o</sup>, 90<sup>o</sup> = −5.3 <sup>o</sup>).”</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>At time zero, reconstruction with suture augmentation decreases knee external rotation compared to reconstruction alone. Both reconstruction techniques restored restraint to varus rotation back to intact levels at most flexion angles, while neither restored posterior translation back to intact levels.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50992,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biomechanics","volume":"123 ","pages":"Article 106461"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268003325000336","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Posterolateral corner injuries are relatively uncommon but difficult to successfully treat. This study evaluates the biomechanical stability of a novel reconstruction technique utilizing suture augmentation and compare it to the traditional LaPrade technique.

Methods

Eight matched pairs of all-male cadaveric knees were divided into two groups: (1) Posterolateral corner reconstruction and (2) reconstruction with suture augmentation. Each knee was tested in 3 states sequentially in isolation: (1) intact, (2) deficient posterolateral corner+Posterior cruciate ligament, and (3) after posterolateral corner reconstruction or reconstruction with suture augmentation. Each knee was repeatedly tested by applying a 134 N posterior load, 10 Nm varus moment, and 5 Nm of external rotary moment at 0, 30, 60, and 90 degrees of flexion while rotation and displacement of the tibia relative to the femur were recorded.

Findings

Both reconstruction techniques restored posterior tibial displacement to levels that were less than the deficient state (p < 0.01) but greater than intact knees (p < 0.001). Suture augmentation recorded less posterior displacement compared to reconstruction alone (30o = −1.2 mm, 60o = −1.0 mm, 90o = −0.6, p < 0.01). Both techniques restored varus stability to intact levels at all flexion angles except at 90o. Suture augmentation allowed external rotation closer to intact values compared to reconstruction alone at all angles (0o = −3.7o, 30o = −4.8o, 60o = −6.0o, 90o = −5.3 o).”

Interpretation

At time zero, reconstruction with suture augmentation decreases knee external rotation compared to reconstruction alone. Both reconstruction techniques restored restraint to varus rotation back to intact levels at most flexion angles, while neither restored posterior translation back to intact levels.
后外侧角和后交叉韧带缺损膝关节模型缝合增强后外侧角重建的生物力学评价
背景:后外侧角损伤相对罕见,但很难成功治疗。本研究评估了一种利用缝合增强的新型重建技术的生物力学稳定性,并将其与传统的LaPrade技术进行了比较。方法将8对匹配的全男性尸体膝关节分为两组:(1)后外侧角重建组和(2)缝合增强重建组。每个膝关节在隔离状态下依次进行3种状态测试:(1)完整,(2)后外侧角+后交叉韧带缺失,(3)后外侧角重建或缝合增强重建。每个膝关节在屈曲0度、30度、60度和90度时,通过施加134 N的后向负荷、10 Nm的内翻力矩和5 Nm的外旋力矩反复测试,同时记录胫骨相对于股骨的旋转和位移。两种重建技术均将胫骨后移位恢复到小于缺损状态的水平(p <;0.01),但大于完整膝关节(p <;0.001)。与单纯重建相比,缝合增强术记录的后侧移位较少(30o = - 1.2 mm, 600o = - 1.0 mm, 90o = - 0.6, p <;0.01)。两种技术均可将除90度外的所有屈曲角度内翻稳定性恢复到完整水平。与单纯重建相比,缝合增强术在所有角度上都能使膝关节的外旋更接近于完整值(0 = - 3.70,300 = - 4.80,600 = - 6.00,90 = - 5.3)。“解释:在时间为0时,与单纯重建相比,缝合增强术能减少膝关节的外旋。这两种重建技术在大多数屈曲角度均将内翻旋转约束恢复到完整水平,但均未将后侧平动恢复到完整水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Biomechanics
Clinical Biomechanics 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
189
审稿时长
12.3 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Biomechanics is an international multidisciplinary journal of biomechanics with a focus on medical and clinical applications of new knowledge in the field. The science of biomechanics helps explain the causes of cell, tissue, organ and body system disorders, and supports clinicians in the diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of treatment methods and technologies. Clinical Biomechanics aims to strengthen the links between laboratory and clinic by publishing cutting-edge biomechanics research which helps to explain the causes of injury and disease, and which provides evidence contributing to improved clinical management. A rigorous peer review system is employed and every attempt is made to process and publish top-quality papers promptly. Clinical Biomechanics explores all facets of body system, organ, tissue and cell biomechanics, with an emphasis on medical and clinical applications of the basic science aspects. The role of basic science is therefore recognized in a medical or clinical context. The readership of the journal closely reflects its multi-disciplinary contents, being a balance of scientists, engineers and clinicians. The contents are in the form of research papers, brief reports, review papers and correspondence, whilst special interest issues and supplements are published from time to time. Disciplines covered include biomechanics and mechanobiology at all scales, bioengineering and use of tissue engineering and biomaterials for clinical applications, biophysics, as well as biomechanical aspects of medical robotics, ergonomics, physical and occupational therapeutics and rehabilitation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信