2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2004.12.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fixation of Tendon Grafts for Collateral Ligament Reconstructions: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
13
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This is in contrast to previous reports showing that interference screw fixation provides more stable constructs as compared to suture tacks and bone anchors [5,6,9]. Investigators have demonstrated that for small-diameter interference screws fixing a single graft, the optimum graft:tunnel ratio is 60- Figure 4 Fixation with an interference screw being tested in the Instron® machine.…”
Section: Druj Instability Is a Commonly Encountered Conditionmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…This is in contrast to previous reports showing that interference screw fixation provides more stable constructs as compared to suture tacks and bone anchors [5,6,9]. Investigators have demonstrated that for small-diameter interference screws fixing a single graft, the optimum graft:tunnel ratio is 60- Figure 4 Fixation with an interference screw being tested in the Instron® machine.…”
Section: Druj Instability Is a Commonly Encountered Conditionmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Also in a biceps tenodesis model, Richards et al 24 found interference screw fixation to have greater resistance to pullout than suture anchor fixation. Lee et al, 21 in a human cadaveric model, tested MCP collateral ligament reconstruction using flexor tendon graft fixation strength with a 4.0-mm biotenodesis screw compared with headless compression screws, sutures over a button, and a suture anchor. They found the biotenodesis screw to have statistically significant higher tensile strength and stiffness compared with the other 3 fixation types.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…16 -23 Screw fixation of tendon to bone has been demonstrated to have greater load to failure than other types of fixation including suture anchors and suture over a bone bridge or button. 17,21,24 Degradable biotenodesis screws have theoretical advantages over metal interference screws including less stress shielding as they slowly degrade, elimination of additional procedures for hardware removal, and simpler revision surgery if required. [25][26][27] We present a consecutive series of patients treated with basilar joint reconstruction using a resorbable interference screw for fixation of the FCR tendon to the first metacarpal base.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies have demonstrated that the interference screw produces a statistically significant increase in pullout strength and stiffness over a bonesuture anchor [21]. Maintaining stiffness of the construct over time is one of the biggest challenges in SL reconstruction procedures, and thus using this stronger fixation method should improve surgical outcomes.…”
Section: Theoretical Advantagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present, we are not aware of any procedure that directly restores the action of both of these ligaments. Recent studies have indicated that interference screw fixation for tendon grafts produces higher pullout strength and stiffness than other traditionally used fixation methods [21]. Therefore, we developed a novel, all-dorsal technique that recreates the function of the SLIL and DIC, and fixes the graft into the scaphoid with an interference screw.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%