Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Maradei-Pereira,João Alberto Ramos
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Kokron,Alexandre Estevão Vamos, Pereira,César Augusto Martins, Amatuzzi,Marco Martins
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162019000500531
Resumo: Abstract Objective To evaluate the biomechanical effect of graft thickness compared with the double-bundle technique on posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction in human cadaveric knees. Methods A total of 9 human cadaveric knees were tested in 5 conditions: intact knee (INT); single-bundle reconstruction with a 10-mm quadriceps tendon (SB); double-bundle reconstruction with a 10 mm-quadriceps tendon for the anterolateral bundle and a 7-mm doubled semitendinosus tendon for the posteromedial bundle (DB); single-bundle reconstruction with a 10-mm quadriceps tendon plus a 7-mm doubled semitendinosus tendon (SBT); and PCL-deficient (NoPCL). The posterior tibial translation (PTT) was measured in response to a 134-N posterior tibial load at 0º, 30º, 60º e 90º of knee flexion. Results The PTT values of the DB and SBT techniques were always significantly lower (better stability) than those of the SB technique. The PTT values of the SBT technique were significantly lower than those of the DB technique at 60º (p = 0.005) and 90º (p = 0.001). Conclusions Graft enlargement improves knee stability in isolated PCL reconstructions, whereas the graft division in the two-bundle technique worsens this stability at 60º and 90º of knee flexion. The findings of the present study suggest that knee stability in PCL reconstructions may be improved with the use of thicker grafts in the SB technique rather than performing the DB technique.
id SBOT-2_883fba6b9e9f971321b54a8e4d00a85e
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0102-36162019000500531
network_acronym_str SBOT-2
network_name_str Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadaversknee injuriesposterior cruciate ligamentbiomechanical phenomenacadaverposterior cruciate ligament reconstructionAbstract Objective To evaluate the biomechanical effect of graft thickness compared with the double-bundle technique on posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction in human cadaveric knees. Methods A total of 9 human cadaveric knees were tested in 5 conditions: intact knee (INT); single-bundle reconstruction with a 10-mm quadriceps tendon (SB); double-bundle reconstruction with a 10 mm-quadriceps tendon for the anterolateral bundle and a 7-mm doubled semitendinosus tendon for the posteromedial bundle (DB); single-bundle reconstruction with a 10-mm quadriceps tendon plus a 7-mm doubled semitendinosus tendon (SBT); and PCL-deficient (NoPCL). The posterior tibial translation (PTT) was measured in response to a 134-N posterior tibial load at 0º, 30º, 60º e 90º of knee flexion. Results The PTT values of the DB and SBT techniques were always significantly lower (better stability) than those of the SB technique. The PTT values of the SBT technique were significantly lower than those of the DB technique at 60º (p = 0.005) and 90º (p = 0.001). Conclusions Graft enlargement improves knee stability in isolated PCL reconstructions, whereas the graft division in the two-bundle technique worsens this stability at 60º and 90º of knee flexion. The findings of the present study suggest that knee stability in PCL reconstructions may be improved with the use of thicker grafts in the SB technique rather than performing the DB technique.Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia2019-10-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162019000500531Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia v.54 n.5 2019reponame:Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)instacron:SBOT10.1016/j.rboe.2017.12.010info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMaradei-Pereira,João Alberto RamosKokron,Alexandre Estevão VamosPereira,César Augusto MartinsAmatuzzi,Marco Martinseng2019-11-12T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-36162019000500531Revistahttp://www.rbo.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||rbo@sbot.org.br1982-43780102-3616opendoar:2019-11-12T00:00Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers
title Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers
spellingShingle Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers
Maradei-Pereira,João Alberto Ramos
knee injuries
posterior cruciate ligament
biomechanical phenomena
cadaver
posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
title_short Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers
title_full Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers
title_fullStr Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers
title_full_unstemmed Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers
title_sort Thick Graft Versus Double-Bundle Technique on Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experimental Biomechanical Study with Cadavers
author Maradei-Pereira,João Alberto Ramos
author_facet Maradei-Pereira,João Alberto Ramos
Kokron,Alexandre Estevão Vamos
Pereira,César Augusto Martins
Amatuzzi,Marco Martins
author_role author
author2 Kokron,Alexandre Estevão Vamos
Pereira,César Augusto Martins
Amatuzzi,Marco Martins
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Maradei-Pereira,João Alberto Ramos
Kokron,Alexandre Estevão Vamos
Pereira,César Augusto Martins
Amatuzzi,Marco Martins
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv knee injuries
posterior cruciate ligament
biomechanical phenomena
cadaver
posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
topic knee injuries
posterior cruciate ligament
biomechanical phenomena
cadaver
posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
description Abstract Objective To evaluate the biomechanical effect of graft thickness compared with the double-bundle technique on posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction in human cadaveric knees. Methods A total of 9 human cadaveric knees were tested in 5 conditions: intact knee (INT); single-bundle reconstruction with a 10-mm quadriceps tendon (SB); double-bundle reconstruction with a 10 mm-quadriceps tendon for the anterolateral bundle and a 7-mm doubled semitendinosus tendon for the posteromedial bundle (DB); single-bundle reconstruction with a 10-mm quadriceps tendon plus a 7-mm doubled semitendinosus tendon (SBT); and PCL-deficient (NoPCL). The posterior tibial translation (PTT) was measured in response to a 134-N posterior tibial load at 0º, 30º, 60º e 90º of knee flexion. Results The PTT values of the DB and SBT techniques were always significantly lower (better stability) than those of the SB technique. The PTT values of the SBT technique were significantly lower than those of the DB technique at 60º (p = 0.005) and 90º (p = 0.001). Conclusions Graft enlargement improves knee stability in isolated PCL reconstructions, whereas the graft division in the two-bundle technique worsens this stability at 60º and 90º of knee flexion. The findings of the present study suggest that knee stability in PCL reconstructions may be improved with the use of thicker grafts in the SB technique rather than performing the DB technique.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-10-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162019000500531
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162019000500531
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1016/j.rboe.2017.12.010
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia v.54 n.5 2019
reponame:Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
instacron:SBOT
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
instacron_str SBOT
institution SBOT
reponame_str Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
collection Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||rbo@sbot.org.br
_version_ 1752122362022592512