Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChapman, G.
dc.contributor.authorHannah, J.
dc.contributor.authorVij, N.
dc.contributor.authorLiu, J.N.
dc.contributor.authorMorrison, M.J.
dc.contributor.authorAmin, N.
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-14T00:23:13Z
dc.date.available2024-08-14T00:23:13Z
dc.date.issued2023-02-16
dc.identifier.citationChapman G, Hannah J, Vij N, Liu JN, Morrison MJ, Amin N. Biomechanical Comparison of Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Soft Tissue ACL Reconstruction. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2023;11(2). doi:10.1177/23259671221146788
dc.identifier.issn2325-9671
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/23259671221146788
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/674299
dc.description.abstractBackground: Several new adjustable-loop devices (ALDs) for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) have not been tested in vitro. Purpose: To compare the biomechanical performances of 5 ALDs under a high cyclic load and forces representative of the return-to-play conditions seen in the recovering athlete. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 10 devices for each of 5 chosen ALDs (UltraButton [Smith & Nephew], RigidLoop [DePuy Mitek], ProCinch [Stryker], TightRope [Arthrex], and ToggleLoc [Biomet]) were tested in a device-only model. The devices were secured to a servohydraulic test machine and preconditioned from 10 to 75 N at a rate of 0.5 Hz for 20 cycles. They were then subjected to high cyclic forces (100-500 N for 4000 cycles) and subsequently pulled to failure at 50 mm/min. The preconditioning displacement, permanent deformation, cumulative peak displacement, stiffness coefficient, and load to failure data were collected. Results: The UltraButton displayed the greatest preconditioning displacement (0.22 ± 0.20 mm), followed by the RigidLoop (0.11 ± 0.03 mm), ProCinch (0.07 ± 0.04 mm), TightRope (0.07 ± 0.02 mm), and ToggleLoc (0.02 ± 0.03 mm). The TightRope displayed the greatest permanent deformation (3.19 ± 1.03 mm) followed by the UltraButton (2.14 ± 0.92 mm), ToggleLoc (2.02 ± 1.09 mm), RigidLoop (1.67 ± 0.1 mm), and ProCinch (1.38 ± 0.18 mm). The TightRope displayed the greatest cumulative peak displacement (3.69 ± 1.03 mm) followed by the UltraButton (2.46 ± 0.92 mm), ToggleLoc (2.37 ± 1.08 mm), RigidLoop (2.01 ± 0.1 mm), and ProCinch (1.75 ± 0.19 mm). The UltraButton displayed the largest stiffness coefficient (1347.22 ± 136.33 N/mm) followed by the RigidLoop (1325.4 ± 116.37 N/mm), ToggleLoc (1216.62 ± 131.32 N/mm), ProCinch (1155.56 ± 88.04), and TightRope (848.48 ± 31.94). The ToggleLoc displayed the largest load to failure (1874.42 ± 101.08 N) followed by the RigidLoop (1614.12 ± 129.11 N), UltraButton (1391.69 ± 142.04 N), ProCinch (1384.85 ± 58.62 N), and TightRope (991.8 ± 51.1 N.) Conclusion: The 5 ALDs exhibited different biomechanical properties. None of them had peak cumulative displacements for which the confidence interval lay above 3 mm, thus no single device was determined to have a higher rate of clinical failure compared with the others. Clinical Relevance: ALD choice may affect biomechanics after ACLR. © The Author(s) 2023.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSAGE Publications Ltd
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2023. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectACL
dc.subjectadjustable loop device
dc.subjectcortical button
dc.subjectligament reconstruction
dc.subjectsports medicine
dc.titleBiomechanical Comparison of Adjustable-Loop Femoral Cortical Suspension Devices for Soft Tissue ACL Reconstruction
dc.typeArticle
dc.typetext
dc.contributor.departmentCollege of Medicine, University of Arizona
dc.identifier.journalOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
dc.description.noteOpen access journal
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.
dc.eprint.versionFinal Published Version
dc.source.journaltitleOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
refterms.dateFOA2024-08-14T00:23:13Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
chapman-et-al-2023.pdf
Size:
449.2Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published Version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© The Author(s) 2023. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © The Author(s) 2023. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).