AUTHOR=Natsios Pavlos , Capaul Rahel , Kopf Norbert , Pozzi Antonio , Tinga Selena , Park Brian 

TITLE=Biomechanical evaluation of a fixation technique with a modified hemicerclage for tibial tuberosity transposition: an ex vivo cadaveric study

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Veterinary Science

VOLUME=11

YEAR=2024

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/veterinary-science/articles/10.3389/fvets.2024.1375380

DOI=10.3389/fvets.2024.1375380

ISSN=2297-1769

ABSTRACT=<sec id="sec1"><title>Objectives</title><p>(1) To determine stiffness, load at failure, and mode of failure of a novel fixation method with a tension modified-hemicerclage (MH) for tibial tuberosity transposition, and (2) to compare the biomechanical properties of this novel fixation technique to 2 pins (2Pins) and 2 pins and tension band wire fixation (2Pins + TBW).</p></sec><sec id="sec2"><title>Study design</title><p>Thirty cadaveric stifles from dogs between 5.2 and 13.1 kg were assigned to 3 treatment groups: Group 1: fixation technique with MH; Group 2: 2Pins; Group 3: 2Pins + TBW. Biomechanical testing was performed with the tibia positioned at an angle of 135° relative to vertical position. Tensile force was applied to the patellar ligament until catastrophic failure was observed. The mode of failure, the load at failure, and the stiffness were compared among treatment groups.</p></sec><sec id="sec3"><title>Results</title><p>The mean stiffness of the novel fixation (38.1 N/mm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.1) and the 2Pins + TBW (40.2 N/mm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9.3) were greater than the 2Pins (26.7 N/mm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.7). There was no significant difference between the novel fixation technique and 2Pins + TBW in stiffness and maximum load to failure. The 2Pins (284.3 N <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 70.5) failed at a significantly lower load than the tension modified-hemicerclage (555.7 N <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 225.9 N) and 2Pins + TBW (715.3 N <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 339.8 N).</p></sec><sec id="sec4"><title>Conclusion</title><p>A fixation technique using a modified hemicerclage had the same strength and stiffness as the 2Pins + TBW and was stronger and stiffer than the 2 Pins technique in a cadaveric model.</p></sec>