Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38576875›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2024

Biomechanical Stability of Third-Generation Adjustable Suture Loop Devices Versus Continuous Loop Button Device for Cortical Fixation of ACL Tendon Grafts.

Adrian Deichsel, Lara Leibrandt, Michael J Raschke, Matthias Klimek, Simon Oeckenpöhler, Elmar Herbst, Christoph Kittl, Johannes Glasbrenner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adrian DeichselDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Lara LeibrandtDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Michael J RaschkeDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Matthias KlimekDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Simon OeckenpöhlerDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Elmar HerbstDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Christoph KittlDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Johannes GlasbrennerDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
University Hospital Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Concerns regarding the primary stability of early adjustable loop button (ALB) devices for cortical fixation of tendon grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) have led to the development of new implant designs. Purpose: To evaluate biomechanical stability of recent ALB implants in comparison with a continuous loop button (CLB) device. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: ACLR was performed in a porcine model (n = 40) using 2-strand porcine flexor tendons with a diameter of 8 mm. Three ALB devices (Infinity Button [ALB1 group]; Tightrope II RT [ALB2 group]; A-TACK [ALB3 group]) and 1 CLB device (FlippTack with polyethylene suture) were used for cortical tendon graft fixation. Cyclic loading (1000 cycles up to 250 N) with complete unloading were applied to the free end of the tendon graft using a uniaxial testing machine, followed by load to failure. Elongation, stiffness, yield load, and ultimate failure load were recorded and compared between the groups using a Kruskal-Wallis test with post hoc Dunn correction. Results: Elongation after 1000 cycles at 250 N was similar between groups (ALB1, 4.5 ± 0.7 mm; ALB2, 4.8 ± 0.8 mm; ALB3, 4.5 ± 0.6 mm; CLB, 4.5 ± 0.8 mm), as was load to failure (ALB1, 838 ± 109 N; ALB2, 930 ± 89 N; ALB3, 809 ± 103 N; CLB, 842 ± 80 N). Stiffness was significantly higher in the ALB1 group compared with the CLB group (262.3 ± 21.6 vs 229.3 ± 15.1 N/mm; Conclusion: The tested third-generation ALB devices for cortical fixation in ACLR withstood cyclic loading with complete unloading without significant differences to a CLB device. Clinical Relevance: The third-generation ALB devices tested in the present study provided biomechanical stability comparable with that of a CLB device. Furthermore, ultimate failure loads of all tested implants exceeded the loads expected to occur in the postoperative period after ACLR.

Indexed as

ACL reconstructionadjustable loop buttoncontinuous loop buttoncortical fixation

Identifiers

PMID38576875
PMCPMC10993678
OpenAlexW4393853765

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.