Editorial Type:
Bone, Joint, and Cartilage

Mechanical strength of four allograft fixation techniques for ruptured cranial cruciate ligament repair in dogs

Jeffery J. Biskup Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.

Search for other papers by Jeffery J. Biskup in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM
,
Daniel G. Balogh Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108.

Search for other papers by Daniel G. Balogh in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 VMD
,
Kevin H. Haynes Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108.

Search for other papers by Kevin H. Haynes in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM
,
Andy L. Freeman Excelen: Center for Bone and Joint Research and Education, 700 10th Ave S, Minneapolis, MN 55415.

Search for other papers by Andy L. Freeman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 MSE
, and
Michael G. Conzemius Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108.

Search for other papers by Michael G. Conzemius in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM, PhD
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.76.5.411
Volume/Issue:
Volume 76: Issue 5
Online Publication Date:
01 May 2015
Restricted access
Sign In Reprints and Permissions Purchase Article

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To test ex vivo mechanical properties of 4 allograft fixation techniques for cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) replacement.

SAMPLE 30 stifle joints from canine cadavers.

PROCEDURES CCL-deficient stifle joints repaired by 1 of 4 techniques (n = 6/group) and CCL-intact stifle joints (control group; 6) were mechanically tested. Three repair techniques involved a patella-patella ligament segment (PPL) allograft: a tibial and femoral interference screw (PPL-2S), a femoral interference screw and the patella seated in a tapering bone tunnel in the tibia (PPL-1S), or addition of a suture and a bone anchor to the PPL-1S (PPL-SL). The fourth technique involved a deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) allograft secured with transverse femoral fixation and stabilized with a tibial interference screw and 2 spiked washers on the tibia (DDFT-TF). The tibia was axially loaded at a joint angle of 135°. Loads to induce 3, 5, and 10 mm of femoral-tibia translation; stiffness; and load at ultimate failure with the corresponding displacement were calculated. Group means were compared with a multivariate ANOVA.

RESULTS Mean ± SD load for the intact (control) CCL was 520.0 ± 51.3 N and did not differ significantly from the load needed to induce 3 mm of femoral-tibial translation for fixation techniques PPL-SL (422.4 ± 46.3 N) and DDFT-TF (654.2 ± 117.7 N). Results for the DDFT-TF were similar to those of the intact CCL for all outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE The DDFT-TF yielded mechanical properties similar to those of intact CCLs and may be a viable technique to test in vivo.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To test ex vivo mechanical properties of 4 allograft fixation techniques for cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) replacement.

SAMPLE 30 stifle joints from canine cadavers.

PROCEDURES CCL-deficient stifle joints repaired by 1 of 4 techniques (n = 6/group) and CCL-intact stifle joints (control group; 6) were mechanically tested. Three repair techniques involved a patella-patella ligament segment (PPL) allograft: a tibial and femoral interference screw (PPL-2S), a femoral interference screw and the patella seated in a tapering bone tunnel in the tibia (PPL-1S), or addition of a suture and a bone anchor to the PPL-1S (PPL-SL). The fourth technique involved a deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) allograft secured with transverse femoral fixation and stabilized with a tibial interference screw and 2 spiked washers on the tibia (DDFT-TF). The tibia was axially loaded at a joint angle of 135°. Loads to induce 3, 5, and 10 mm of femoral-tibia translation; stiffness; and load at ultimate failure with the corresponding displacement were calculated. Group means were compared with a multivariate ANOVA.

RESULTS Mean ± SD load for the intact (control) CCL was 520.0 ± 51.3 N and did not differ significantly from the load needed to induce 3 mm of femoral-tibial translation for fixation techniques PPL-SL (422.4 ± 46.3 N) and DDFT-TF (654.2 ± 117.7 N). Results for the DDFT-TF were similar to those of the intact CCL for all outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE The DDFT-TF yielded mechanical properties similar to those of intact CCLs and may be a viable technique to test in vivo.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Biskup (jbiskup@utk.edu).
Cover American Journal of Veterinary Research
American Journal of Veterinary Research
Publication Date:
01 May 2015

  • 1. Johnson JA, Austin C, Breur GJ. Incidence of canine appendicular musculoskeletal disorders in 16 veterinary teaching hospitals from 1980 to 1989. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 56–59.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 2. Wucherer KL, Conzemius MG, Evans RB, et al. Short-term and long-term outcomes for overweight dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture treated surgically or nonsurgically. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2013; 242: 1364–1372.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 3. Chauvet AE, Johnson AL, Pijanowski GJ, et al. Evaluation of fibular head transposition, lateral fabellar suture, and conservative treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in large dogs: a retrospective study. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1996; 32: 247–255.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 4. Ekins AD, Pechman R, Kearney MT, et al. A retrospective study evaluating the degree of degenerative joint disease in the stifle joint of dogs following surgical repair of anterior cruciate ligament rupture. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1991; 27: 533–540.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 5. Lazar TP, Berry CR, deHaan JJ, et al. Long-term radiographic comparison of tibial plateau leveling osteotomy versus extra-capsular stabilization for cranial cruciate ligament rupture in the dog. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 133–141.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 6. Leighton RL. Preferred method of repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs: a survey of ACVS diplomates specializing in canine orthopedics (lett). Vet Surg 1999; 28: 194.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 7. Tonks CA, Lewis DD, Pozzi A. A review of extra-articular prosthetic stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 167–177.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 8. Rose ND, Goerke D, Evans RB, et al. Mechanical testing of orthopedic suture material used for extra-articular stabilization of canine cruciate ligament-deficient stifles. Vet Surg 2012; 41: 266–272.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 9. Cabano NR, Troyer KL, Palmer RH, et al. Mechanical comparison of two suture constructs for extra-capsular stifle stabilization. Vet Surg 2011; 40: 334–339.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 10. Roe SC, Kue J, Gemma J. Isometry of potential suture attachment sites for the cranial cruciate ligament deficient canine stifle. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 215–220.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 11. Hulse D, Hyman W, Beale B, et al. Determination of isometric points for placement of a lateral suture in treatment of the cranial cruciate ligament deficient stifle. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2010; 23: 163–167.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 12. Fischer C, Cherres M, Grevel V, et al. Effects of attachment sites and joint angle at the time of lateral suture fixation on tension in the suture for stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament deficient stifle in dogs. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 334–342.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 13. Kowaleski MP, Apelt D, Mattoon JS, et al. The effect of tibial plateau leveling osteotomy position on cranial tibial subluxation: an in vitro study. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 332–336.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 14. Stauffer KD, Tuttle TA, Elkins AD, et al. Complications associated with 696 tibial plateau leveling osteotomies (2001–2003). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2006; 42: 44–50.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 15. Pacchiana PD, Morris E, Gillings SL, et al. Surgical and postoperative complications associated with tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture: 397 cases (1998–2001). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003; 222: 184–193.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 16. Priddy NH, Tomlinson JL, Dodam JR, et al. Complications with and owner assessment of the outcome of tibial plateau leveling osteotomy for treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs: 193 cases (1997–2001). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003; 222: 1726–1732.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 17. Kim SE, Lewis DD, Pozzi A. Effect of tibial plateau leveling osteotomy on femorotibial subluxation: in vivo analysis during standing. Vet Surg 2012; 41: 465–470.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 18. Innes JF, Barr AR. Clinical natural history of the postsurgical cruciate deficient canine stifle joint: year 1. J Small Anim Pract 1998; 39: 325–332.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 19. Rayward RM, Thomson DG, Davies JV, et al. Progression of osteoarthritis following TPLO surgery: a prospective radiographic study of 40 dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2004; 45: 92–97.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 20. Harilainen A, Sandelin J. A prospective comparison of 3 hamstring ACL fixation devices—Rigidfix, BioScrew, and Intrafix—randomized into 4 groups with 2 years of follow-up. Am J Sports Med 2009; 37: 699–706.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 21. Murray MM. Current status and potential of primary ACL repair. Clin Sports Med 2009; 28: 51–61.

  • 22. Conzemius MG, Evans RB, Besancon MF, et al. Effect of surgical technique on limb function after surgery for rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005; 226: 232–236.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 23. Haut RC, Lancaster RL, DeCamp CE. Mechanical properties of the canine patellar tendon: some correlations with age and the content of collagen. J Biomech 1992; 25: 163–173.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 24. Biskup J, Freeman A, Camisa W, et al. Mechanical properties of canine patella-ligament-tibia segment. Vet Surg 2014; 43: 136–141.

  • 25. Hill C, An YH, Young FA. Tendon and ligament fixation to bone. In: Walsh WR, ed. Repair and regeneration of ligaments, tendons, and joint capsule. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 2005; 257–278.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 26. Rupp S, Krauss PW, Fritsch EW. Fixation strength of a biodegradable interference screw and a press-fit technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a BPTB graft. Arthroscopy 1997; 13: 61–65.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 27. Kousa P, Jarvinen TL, Pohjonen T, et al. Fixation strength of a biodegradable screw in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995; 77: 901–905.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 28. Haynes KH, Biskup JJ, Freeman A, et al. Effect of tibial plateau angle on cranial cruciate ligament strain: an ex vivo study in the dog. Vet Surg 2015; 44: 46–49.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 29. Evans R, Horstman C, Conzemius M. Accuracy and optimization of force platform gait analysis in Labradors with cranial cruciate disease evaluated at a walking gait. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 445–449.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 30. Trump M, Palathinkal DM, Beaupre L, et al. In vitro biomechanical testing of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: traditional versus physiologically relevant load analysis. Knee 2011; 18: 193–201.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 31. Beynnon BD, Johnson RJ, Toyama H. at al. The relationship between anterior-posterior knee laxity and structural properties of the patella tendon graft: a study in canines. Am J Sports Med 1994; 22: 812–820.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 32. Mirzatolooei F. Comparison of short term clinical outcomes between transtibial and transportal TransFix femoral fixation in hamstring ACL reconstruction. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2012; 46: 361–366.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 33. Milano G, Mulas PD, Ziranu F, et al. Comparison between different femoral fixation devices for ACL reconstruction with doubled hamstring tendon graft: a biomechanical analysis. Arthroscopy 2006; 22: 660–668.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 34. Butler DL, Hulse DA, Kay MD, et al. Biomechanics of cranial cruciate ligament reconstruction in the dog II. Mechanical properties. Vet Surg 1983; 12: 113–118.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 35. Gupta BN, Subramanian KN, Brinker WO, et al. Tensile strength of canine cranial cruciate ligaments. Am J Vet Res 1971; 32: 183–190.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 36. Nikolaou PK, Seaber AV, Glisson RR, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament allograft transplantation. Long-term function, histology, revascularization, and operative technique. Am J Sports Med 1986; 14: 348–360.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 37. Figgie HE III, Bahniuk EH, Heiple KG, et al. The effects of tibialfemoral angle on the failure mechanics of the canine anterior cruciate ligament. J Biomech 1986; 19: 89–91.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 38. Wingfield C, Amis AA, Stead AC, et al. Comparison of the biomechanical properties of Rottweiler and racing Greyhound cranial cruciate ligaments. J Small Anim Pract 2000; 41: 303–307.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 39. Scheffler SU, Sudkamp NP, Gockenjan A, et al. Biomechanical comparison of hamstring and patellar tendon graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques: the impact of fixation level and fixation method under cyclic loading. Arthroscopy 2002; 18: 304–315.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 40. Vasseur PB, Rodrigo JJ, Stevenson S, et al. Replacement of the anterior cruciate ligament with a bone-ligament-bone anterior cruciate ligament allograft in dogs. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987; 268–277.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 41. Vasseur PB, Pool RR, Arnoczky SP, et al. Correlative biomechanical and histologic study of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. Am J Vet Res 1985; 46: 1842–1854.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 42. Cvetanovich GL, Mascarenhas R, Saccomanno MF, et al. Hamstring autograft versus soft-tissue allograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arthroscopy 2014; 30: 1616–1624.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 43. Thorson E, Rodrigo JJ, Vasseur P, et al. Replacement of the anterior cruciate ligament. A comparison of autografts and allografts in dogs. Acta Orthop Scand 1989; 60: 555–560.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement