Polymers in Medicine

Polim. Med.
Scopus CiteScore: 3.5 (CiteScore Tracker 3.6)
Index Copernicus (ICV 2023) – 121.14
MEiN – 70
ISSN 0370-0747 (print)
ISSN 2451-2699 (online) 
Periodicity – biannual

Download PDF

Polymers in Medicine

2016, vol. 46, nr 1, January-June, p. 53–58

doi: 10.17219/pim/65054

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

Comparison of Bioabsorbable Interference Screws Composed of Poly-l-lactic Acid and Hydroxyapatite (PLLA-HA) to WasherLoc Tibial Fixation in Patients After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction of the Knee Joint

Mateusz Patkowski1,A,B,C,D,E,F, Aleksandra Królikowska2,A,B,C,F, Paweł Reichert3,A,C,D,E,F

1 Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology Surgery, T. Marciniak Lower Silesian Specialist Hospital – Emergency Medicine Center, Wrocław, Poland

2 Department of Physiotherapy, The College of Physiotherapy in Wroclaw, Wrocław, Poland

3 Department of Traumatology, Clinic of Traumatology and Hand Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland

Abstract

Background. The reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) of the knee joint is a standard in ACL complete rupture treatment in athletes. One of the weakest points of this procedure is tibial fixation of grafts.
Objectives. The aim was, firstly, to evaluate patients 3–4 years after primary ACL reconstruction with the use of autologous ipsilateral STGR grafts and with tibial fixation using a bioabsorbable interference screw composed of PLLA-HA or WasherLoc, comparing the postoperative result to the preoperative condition and, secondly, to compare the results between the two groups of patients with different tibial fixation.
Material and Methods. Group I consisted of 20 patients with a bioabsorbable interference screw composed of PLLA-HA tibial fixation. In Group II, there were 22 patients after ACL reconstruction with the use of WasherLoc tibial fixation. The Lachman test, pivot-shift test, Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale and 2000 International Knee Documentation Committee (2000 IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form were used to evaluate the results.
Results. The intra-group comparison of the results of the 2000 IKDC Subjective Knee Evaluation Form and Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale obtained in the groups studied showed statistically significant differences between the evaluation performed preoperatively and postoperatively. The inter-group comparison of the results of the 2000 IKDC Subjective Knee Evaluation Form and Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale obtained postoperatively showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups.
Conclusion. An evaluation 3–4 years after ACL reconstruction with the use of autologous ipsilateral STGR grafts demonstrated significant progress from the preoperative condition to the postoperative result in patients with tibial fixation using a bioabsorbable interference screw composed of PLLA-HA as well as in patients with WasherLoc tibial fixation. There were no differences found between the two groups of patients after ACL reconstruction in terms of manual stability testing or a subjective assessment of knee joint outcomes.

Key words

anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, bone screws, orthopedic fixation devices

References (30)

  1. Ekstrand J.: A 94% return to elite level football after ACL surgery: A proof of possibilities with optimal caretaking or a sign of knee abuse? Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc. 2011, 19, 1–2. doi: 10.1007/s00167-010-1300-4.
  2. Fithian D.C., Paxton L.W., Goltz D.H.: Fate of the anterior cruciate ligament-injured knee. Orthop. Clin. North Am. 2002, 33, 621–636.
  3. Fithian D.C., Paxton E.W., Stone M.L. et al: Prospective trial of a treatment algorithm for the management of the anterior cruciate ligament-injured knee. Am. J. Sports Med. 2005, 33, 335–346.
  4. Zaffagnini S., Marcacci M., Lo Presti M., Giordano G., Iacono F., Neri M.P.: Prospective and randomized evaluation of ACL reconstruction with three techniques: A clinical and radiographic evaluation at 5 years follow-up. Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc. 2006, 14, 1060–1069.
  5. Marumo K., Saito M., Yamagishi T., Fujii K.: The “ligamentization” process in human anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autogenous patellar and hamstring tendons: A biochemical study. Am. J. Sports Med. 2005, 33, 1166–1173.
  6. Goradia V.K., Rochat M.C., Kida M., Grana W.A.: Natural history of a hamstring tendon autograft used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a sheep model. Am. J. Sports Med. 2000, 28, 40–46.
  7. Ibrahim S.A., Al-Kussary I.M., Al-Misfer A.R., Al-Mutairi H.Q., Ghafar S.A., El Noor T.A.: Clinical evaluation of arthroscopically assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Patellar tendon versus gracilis and semitendinosus autograft. Arthroscopy 2005, 21, 412–417.
  8. Goldblatt J.P., Fitzsimmons S.E., Balk E., Richmond J.C.: Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: Meta-analysis of patellar tendon versus hamstring tendon autograft. Arthroscopy 2005, 21, 791–803.
  9. Rahr-Wagner L., Thillemann T.M., Pedersen A.B., Lind M.: Comparison of hamstring tendon and patellar tendon grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a nationwide population-based cohort study: Results from the Danish registry of knee ligament reconstruction. Am. J. Sports Med. 2014, 42, 278–284. doi: 10.1177/0363546513509220.
  10. Scranton P.E. Jr, Bagenstose J.E., Lantz B.A., Friedman M.J., Khalfayan E.E., Auld M.K.: Quadruple hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A multicenter study. Arthroscopy 2002, 18, 715–724.
  11. Brand J. Jr, Weiler A., Caborn D.N., Brown C.H. Jr, Johnson D.L.: Graft fixation in cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am. J. Sports Med. 2000, 28, 761–774.
  12. Kousa P., Järvinen T.L., Vihavainen M., Kannus P., Järvinen M.: The fixation strength of six hamstring tendon graft fixation devices in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Part II: tibial site. Am. J. Sports Med. 2003, 31, 182–188.
  13. Macarini L., Milillo P., Mocci A., Vinci R., Ettorre G.C.: Poly-L-lactic acid – hydroxyapatite (PLLA-HA) bioabsorbable interference screws for tibial graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery: MR evaluation of osteointegration and degradation features. Radiol. Med. 2008, 113, 1185–1197. doi: 10.1007/s11547-008-0334-x.
  14. Howell S.M., Roos P., Hull M.L.: Compaction of a bone dowel in the tibial tunnel improves the fixation stiffness of a soft tissue anterior cruciate ligament graft: an in vitro study in calf tibia. Am. J. Sports Med. 2005, 33, 719–725.
  15. Royston P.: Remark AS R94: A remark on algorithm AS 181: The w-test for normality. J. Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics) 1995, 44, 547–551.
  16. Duffee A., Magnussen R.A., Pedroza A.D., Flanigan D.C.: MOON group, Kaeding CC: Transtibial ACL femoral tunnel preparation increases odds of repeat ipsilateral knee surgery. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2013, 95, 2035–2042. doi: 10.2106/ JBJS.M.00187.
  17. Tejwani S.G., Chen J., Funahashi T.T., Love R., Maletis G.B.: Revision risk after allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Association with graft processing techniques, patient characteristics, and graft type. Am. J. Sports Med. 2015, 43, 2696–2705. doi: 10.1177/0363546515589168.
  18. Bedi A., Musahl V., Steuber V. et al.: Transtibial versus anteromedial portal reaming in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: An anatomic and biomechanical evaluation of surgical technique. Arthroscopy 2011, 27, 380–390. doi: 10.1016/j. arthro.2010.07.018.
  19. Maletis G.B., Inacio M.C., Desmond J.L., Funahashi T.T.: Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: Association of graft choice with increased risk of early revision. Bone Joint J. 2013, 95-B, 623–628. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B5.30872.
  20. West R.V., Harner C.D.: Graft selection in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg. 2005, 13, 197–207.
  21. Coleridge S.D., Amis A.A.: A comparison of five tibial-fixation systems in hamstring-graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc. 2004, 12, 391–397.
  22. Kurosaka M., Yoshiya S., Andrish J.T.: A biomechanical comparison of different surgical techniques of graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am. J. Sports Med. 1987, 15, 225–229.
  23. Lambert K.L.: Vascularized patellar tendon graft with rigid internal fixation for anterior cruciate ligament insufficiency. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1983, 85–89.
  24. Ambrose C.G., Clanton T.O.: Bioabsorbable implants: Review of clinical experience in orthopedic surgery. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2004, 32, 171–177.
  25. Weiler A., Hoffmann R.F., Stähelin A.C., Helling H.J., Südkamp N.P.: Biodegradable implants in sports medicine: The biological base. Arthroscopy 2000, 16, 305–321.
  26. Cox C.L., Spindler K.P., Leonard JP, Morris BJ, Dunn WR, Reinke EK: Do newer-generation bioabsorbable screws become incorporated into bone at two years after ACL reconstruction with patellar tendon graft?: A cohort study. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2014, 96, 244–250. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01652.
  27. Howell S.M., Taylor M.A.: Brace-free rehabilitation, with early return to activity, for knees reconstructed with a doublelooped semitendinosus and gracilis graft. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 1996, 78, 814–825.
  28. Howell S.M., Deutsch M.L.: Comparison of endoscopic and two-incision techniques for reconstructing a torn anterior cruciate ligament using hamstring tendons. Arthroscopy 1999, 15, 594–606.
  29. Scannell B.P., Loeffler B.J., Hoenig M et al.: Biomechanical comparison of hamstring tendon fixation devices for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Part 2. Four tibial devices. Am. J. Orthop. (Belle Mead NJ) 2015, 44, 82–85.
  30. Czamara A.: Functional benchmarking of rehabilitation outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Ortop. Traumatol. Rehabil. 2010, 12, 519–533.
© Wroclaw Medical University