ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2020
Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel Loop Retention Mechanism for Cortical Graft Fixation in ACL Reconstruction.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Full-Construct Biomechanical Evaluation of Femoral Cortical Suspensory Fixation for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Porcine Knee Model.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Risk for Revision ACLR After Primary All-Inside Quadrupled Semitendinosus Hamstring Tendon Autograft ACLR With Independent Suture Tape Augmentation: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Biomechanical Stability of Third-Generation Adjustable Suture Loop Devices Versus Continuous Loop Button Device for Cortical Fixation of ACL Tendon Grafts.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Adjustable-Loop Suspensory Devices for All-Inside ACL Reconstruction: A Time-Zero Full-Construct Model.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Tibial Fixation Devices for Quadrupled Hamstring ACL Reconstruction.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Suspension button constructs restore posterior knee laxity in solid tibial avulsion of the posterior cruciate ligament.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021Article
- Randomized comparative study of suspension femoral fixation device in graft position maintenance in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: EndoButton CL vs TightRope RT.Asia-Pacific journal of sports medicine, arthroscopy, rehabilitation and technology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplant fixation by means of a cortical fixation device (CFD) has become a routine procedure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. There is no clear consensus whether adjustable-length CFDs are more susceptible to loop lengthening when compared with pretied fixed-length CFDs. PURPOSE: To assess biomechanical performance measures of 3 types of CFDs when subjected to various loading protocols. STUDY
designControlled laboratory study.
methodsThree types of CFDs underwent biomechanical testing: 1 fixed length and 2 adjustable length. One of the adjustable-length devices is based on the so-called finger trap mechanism, and the other is based on a modified sling lock mechanism. A device-only test of 5000 cycles (n = 8 per group) and a tendon-device test of 1000 cycles (n = 8 per group) with lower and upper force limits of 50 and 250 N, respectively, were applied, followed by ramp-to-failure testing. Adjustable-length devices then underwent further cyclic testing with complete loop unloading (n = 5 per group) at each cycle, as well as fatigue testing (n = 3 per group) over a total of 1 million cycles. Derived mechanical parameters were compared among the devices for statistical significance using Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance followed by post hoc Mann-Whitney
resultsAll CFDs showed elongation <2 mm after 5000 cycles when tested in an isolated manner and withstood ultimate tensile forces in excess of estimated peak in vivo forces. In both device-only and tendon-device tests, differences in cyclic performance were found among the devices, favoring adjustable-length fixation devices over the fixed-length device. Completely unloading the suspension loops, however, led to excessive loop lengthening of the finger trap device, whereas the modified sling lock device remained stable throughout the test. The fixed-length device displayed superior ultimate strength over both adjustable-length devices. Both adjustable-length devices showed adequate fatigue behavior during high-cyclic testing.
conclusionAll tested devices successfully prevented critical construct elongation when tested with constant tension and withstood ultimate loads in excess of estimated in vivo forces during the rehabilitation phase. The finger trap device gradually lengthened excessively when completely unloaded during cyclic testing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Critical loop lengthening may occur if adjustable-length devices based on the finger trap mechanism are repeatedly unloaded in situ.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.