Biomechanical Comparison of Transtibial Pull-out Fixation Versus Suture Anchor Fixation for Repair of Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Tears

Mark E. Cinque, Maximillian Hinz, Jason Sidrak, Justin F.M. Hollenbeck, Wyatt H. Buchalter, Ajay Kanakamedala, Justin J. Mitchell, Jonathan A. Godin, Matthew T. Provencher
{"title":"Biomechanical Comparison of Transtibial Pull-out Fixation Versus Suture Anchor Fixation for Repair of Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Tears","authors":"Mark E. Cinque, Maximillian Hinz, Jason Sidrak, Justin F.M. Hollenbeck, Wyatt H. Buchalter, Ajay Kanakamedala, Justin J. Mitchell, Jonathan A. Godin, Matthew T. Provencher","doi":"10.1177/03635465251342267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Posterior medial meniscus root tears are commonly treated with a transtibial pull-out (TO) repair, but significant postoperative meniscal extrusion has been reported. Recently, knotless adjustable suture anchor fixation has been introduced to treat root tears. This anchor-based fixation demonstrates less cyclic displacement than a TO repair. However, it is unknown how meniscal extrusion and contact mechanics compare between these 2 repair techniques when the meniscus endures cyclic tibiofemoral loading. Hypothesis: Suture anchor repair will demonstrate reduced meniscal extrusion and lower medial compartment pressure at the 1000th cycle compared with the TO repair. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eight pairs of cadaveric knees were used to compare extrusion and contact pressure between transtibial fixation and suture anchor repair techniques for medial meniscus posterior root tears. Each specimen underwent cyclic compressive loading (0th, 100th, 500th, and 1000th cycles). Medial meniscal extrusion was assessed with the knee at full extension using ultrasound, and medial compartment contact pressures were evaluated using pressure sensors. Statistical analyses included paired <jats:italic>t</jats:italic> tests and repeated-measures analysis of variance with an alpha level set at .05. Results: The suture anchor repair technique demonstrated significantly lower absolute and relative medial meniscal extrusion compared with transtibial fixation repair after 500 and 1000 cycles of loading ( <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .012 and <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .001, respectively). Similarly, mean medial compartment pressures were significantly lower in the suture anchor repair group compared with the transtibial fixation repair group after 1000 cycles ( <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .028). No significant differences were found in peak pressures between the 2 repair techniques. Conclusion: The suture anchor repair demonstrated lower medial meniscal extrusion and reduced medial compartment contact pressures after time-zero cyclic loading. This biomechanical profile may be important for increasing the likelihood of healing and may translate to improved long-term outcomes for patients undergoing meniscus root repair. Clinical Relevance: Understanding the biomechanical differences between repair techniques at time zero may be crucial for optimizing surgical outcomes and minimizing the risk of long-term joint degeneration after meniscus root tears. Future clinical studies should further investigate these findings in live patient populations to validate their effect on root healing, functional outcomes, and long-term osteoarthritis progression.","PeriodicalId":517411,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465251342267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Posterior medial meniscus root tears are commonly treated with a transtibial pull-out (TO) repair, but significant postoperative meniscal extrusion has been reported. Recently, knotless adjustable suture anchor fixation has been introduced to treat root tears. This anchor-based fixation demonstrates less cyclic displacement than a TO repair. However, it is unknown how meniscal extrusion and contact mechanics compare between these 2 repair techniques when the meniscus endures cyclic tibiofemoral loading. Hypothesis: Suture anchor repair will demonstrate reduced meniscal extrusion and lower medial compartment pressure at the 1000th cycle compared with the TO repair. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eight pairs of cadaveric knees were used to compare extrusion and contact pressure between transtibial fixation and suture anchor repair techniques for medial meniscus posterior root tears. Each specimen underwent cyclic compressive loading (0th, 100th, 500th, and 1000th cycles). Medial meniscal extrusion was assessed with the knee at full extension using ultrasound, and medial compartment contact pressures were evaluated using pressure sensors. Statistical analyses included paired t tests and repeated-measures analysis of variance with an alpha level set at .05. Results: The suture anchor repair technique demonstrated significantly lower absolute and relative medial meniscal extrusion compared with transtibial fixation repair after 500 and 1000 cycles of loading ( P = .012 and P = .001, respectively). Similarly, mean medial compartment pressures were significantly lower in the suture anchor repair group compared with the transtibial fixation repair group after 1000 cycles ( P = .028). No significant differences were found in peak pressures between the 2 repair techniques. Conclusion: The suture anchor repair demonstrated lower medial meniscal extrusion and reduced medial compartment contact pressures after time-zero cyclic loading. This biomechanical profile may be important for increasing the likelihood of healing and may translate to improved long-term outcomes for patients undergoing meniscus root repair. Clinical Relevance: Understanding the biomechanical differences between repair techniques at time zero may be crucial for optimizing surgical outcomes and minimizing the risk of long-term joint degeneration after meniscus root tears. Future clinical studies should further investigate these findings in live patient populations to validate their effect on root healing, functional outcomes, and long-term osteoarthritis progression.
经胫骨拔出内固定与缝合锚定内固定修复内侧半月板后根撕裂的生物力学比较
背景:后内侧半月板根撕裂通常采用经胫骨拔出(TO)修复术治疗,但术后严重的半月板挤压已被报道。最近,无结可调缝线锚定固定被引入治疗牙根撕裂。这种基于锚钉的固定比TO修复显示更少的循环位移。然而,当半月板承受胫股循环负荷时,这两种修复技术对半月板挤压和接触力学的比较尚不清楚。假设:缝线锚定修复将显示减少半月板挤压和下内侧室压力在第1000周期与TO修复。研究设计:实验室对照研究。方法:采用8对尸体膝关节,比较经胫骨固定和缝合锚钉修复内侧半月板后根撕裂的挤压和接触压力。每个试件进行循环压缩加载(第0、第100、第500和第1000循环)。在膝关节完全伸展时使用超声评估内侧半月板挤压,并使用压力传感器评估内侧隔室接触压力。统计分析包括配对t检验和重复测量方差分析,α水平设置为0.05。结果:与经胫骨固定修复术相比,缝合锚钉修复术在500和1000次载荷循环后显示出更低的绝对和相对内侧半月板挤压(P = 0.012和P = 0.001)。同样,缝线锚定修复组在1000次循环后平均内侧室压力明显低于经胫骨固定修复组(P = 0.028)。两种修复方法的峰值压力无显著差异。结论:缝合锚钉修复在零时间循环加载后表现出下内侧半月板挤压和内侧室接触压力降低。这种生物力学特征可能对增加愈合的可能性很重要,并可能转化为接受半月板根修复的患者改善的长期预后。临床意义:了解不同修复技术的生物力学差异对于优化手术效果和减少半月板根撕裂后长期关节退变的风险至关重要。未来的临床研究应该在活的患者群体中进一步调查这些发现,以验证它们对根愈合、功能结局和长期骨关节炎进展的影响。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信