No Difference in Pullout Strength Between a Bio-inductive Implant and a Semitendinosus Tendon Graft in a Biomechanical Study of Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Repair Augmentation.
Journal
Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation
ISSN: 2666-061X
Titre abrégé: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101765256
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2024
Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
09
06
2023
accepted:
26
10
2023
medline:
5
2
2024
pubmed:
5
2
2024
entrez:
5
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To compare the pullout strength of a bio-inductive implant (BI) used to augment a medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) repair with the pullout strength of semitendinosus graft in a biomechanical cadaveric model. Six matched pairs of cadavers (12 knees) were used in the biomechanical testing comparing semitendinosus tendon (Semi-T) versus a BI. The Semi-T was harvested from 1 of the matched pairs. A standard double-bundle technique using 2 sockets in the upper two-thirds of the patella 15 mm apart was performed. After docking of the graft into the patella, the patella was dissected free of soft tissues and potted into a fixture to allow mechanical pull parallel to the transverse axis of the patella. The construct was pulled to failure. There was no statistically significant difference in pullout strength ( In this biomechanical study, augmentation of an MPFL reconstruction using a common double-bundle technique with a BI had the same pullout strength as a semitendinosus graft using the same technique in cadaveric knees. MPFL repair after a patellar dislocation may be inadequate to restore the strength of the native MPFL and prevent recurrent patellar instability. Recurrent instability of the patella can result in progressive injury to the soft tissue and articular cartilage of the patella and femur. It is important to study the techniques used for MPFL repair to continually improve patient outcomes. Further testing of these additional techniques and clinical studies are needed to evaluate the implants used to augment MPFL repairs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38313861
doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2023.100827
pii: S2666-061X(23)00178-5
pmc: PMC10834473
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100827Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report the following potential conflicts of interest or sources of funding: S.M. receives personal fees from Biorez, 10.13039/100019400ConMed, Mitek, BD, Trice Medical, and Micah, outside the submitted work; owns stock in Biorez, Trice Medical, Avalon AI, and Kaliber Technologies, outside the submitted work; and is on the board of directors of American Osteopathic Academy of Orthopedics and New Jersey State Orthopedic Society. M.W. receives grant support for cadaveric specimens from Biorez and Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine; is on the editorial board of Journal of Arthroscopy; is a member of AANA Developmental and Membership Committee; and is AANA representative to 10.13039/100009885American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Board of Specialty Societies. All other authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this work. Full ICMJE author disclosure forms are available for this article online, as supplementary material.