Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 40, Issue 12, pp 2553–2558 | Cite as

Features of human autologous hamstring graft elongation after pre-tensioning in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

  • Masataka Fujii
  • Takayuki FurumatsuEmail author
  • Shinichi Miyazawa
  • Takaaki Tanaka
  • Hiroto Inoue
  • Yuya Kodama
  • Kenji Masuda
  • Noritaka Seno
  • Toshifumi Ozaki
Original Paper

Abstract

Purpose

Precise pre-tensioning protocol of the graft has not been determined in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The aims of this study are to measure the human autologous graft elongation, and to reveal what portion of the graft elongated greater after pre-tensioning in ACL reconstruction.

Methods

Twenty-four hamstring tendon grafts which were harvested from patients were included. A continuous load of 150 N was applied to the graft twice for 30 seconds each (150 N-1 minute), and the same loading was repeatedly applied (150 N-2 minute). The amount of elongation of the tendon portion (Length T) and the stitched portion (Length S) were measured after each pre-tensioning.

Results

Length S gradually increased by 1.57 ± 0.67 mm after the 150 N-1 minute pre-tensioning and by 2.12 ± 0.76 mm after the 150 N-2 minute pre-tensioning, respectively. Length T was not significantly elongated after 150 N-1 min (p = 0.66) and 150 N-2 min (p = 0.59).

Conclusions

Graft elongation of the approximately 2 mm was observed, particularly in the stitched portion. It is necessary for a surgeon to focus on careful removal of slack from each stitch during suturing.

Keywords

Graft elongation Hamstring tendon Pretensioning Anterior cruciate ligament 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Funding information

No funding sources were provided for this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Bernard HP, Hornung H, Cierpinski T (1997) Femoral insertion of the ACL. Radiographic quadrant method. Am J Knee Surg 10(1):14–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Forsythe B, Kopf S, Wong AK, Martins CA, Anderst W, Tashman S, Fu FH (2012) The location of femoral and tibial tunnels in anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction analyzed by three-dimensional computed tomography models. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(6):1418–1426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jepsen CF, Lundberg-Jensen AK, Faunoe P (2007) Does the position of the femoral tunnel affect the laxity or clinical outcome of the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee? A clinical, prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Arthroscopy 23(12):1326–1333CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ejerhed L, Kartus J, Köhler K, Sernert N, Brandsson S, Karlsson J (2001) Preconditioning patellar tendon autografts in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 9(1):6–11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elias JJ, Kilambi S, Ciccone WJ 2nd (2009) Tension level during preconditioning influences hamstring tendon graft properties. Am J Sports Med 37(2):334–338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nurmi JT, Kannus P, Sievänen H, Järvelä T, Järvinen M, Järvinen TL (2004) Interference screw fixation of soft tissue grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: part 2: effect of preconditioning on graft tension during and after screw insertion. Am J Sports Med 32(2):418–424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Konrads C, Reppenhagen S, Plumhoff P, Hoberg M, Rudert M, Barthel T (2016) No significant difference in clinical outcome and knee stability between patellar tendon and semitendinosus tendon in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(4):521–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pinczewski LA, Lyman J, Salmon LJ, Russell VJ, Roe J, Linklater J (2007) A 10-year comparison of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with hamstring tendon and patellar tendon autograft. Am J Sports Med 35:564–574CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carulli C, Matassi F, Soderi S, Sirleo L, Munz G, Innocenti M (2016) Resorbable screw and sheath versus resorbable interference screw and staples for ACL reconstruction: a comparison of two tibial fixation methods. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi: 10.1007/s00167-016-4135-9 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ambra LF, Rezende FC, Xavier B, Shumaker FC, da Silveira Franciozi CE, Luzo MV (2016) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: how do we perform it? Brazilian orthopedic surgeons’ preference. Int Orthop 40:595–600CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cavaignac E, Pailhé R, Reina N, Murgier J, Laffosse JM, Chiron P, Swider P (2016) Can the gracilis replace the anterior cruciate ligament in the knee? A biomechanical study. Int Orthop 40:1647–1653CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goyal S, Matias N, Pandey V, Acharya K (2016) Are pre-operative anthropometric parameters helpful in predicting length and thickness of quadrupled hamstring graft for ACL reconstruction in adults? A prospective study and literature review. Int Orthop 40:173–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mardani-Kivi M, Karimi-Mobarakeh M, Keyhani S, Saheb-Ekhtiari K, Hashemi-Motlagh K, Sarvi A (2016) Hamstring tendon autograft versus fresh-frozen tibialis posterior allograft in primary arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study with three to six years follow-up. Int Orthop 40:1905–1901CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sundararajan SR, Rajagopalakrishnan R, Rajasekaran S (2016) Is height the best predictor for adequacy of semitendinosus-alone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A study of hamstring graft dimensions and anthropometric measurements. Int Orthop 40:1025–1031CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Papalia R, Franceschi F, Tecame A, D’Adamio S, Maffulli N, Denaro V (2015) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and return to sport activity: postural control as the key to success. Int Orthop 39:527–534CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fu FH, Bennett CH, Lattermann C, Ma CB (1999) Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Part 1: Biology and biomechanics of reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 27(6):821–830PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fu FH, Bennett CH, Ma CB, Menetrey J, Lattermann C (2000) Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Part II operative procedures and clinical correlations. Am J Sports Med 28(1):124–130PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beynnon BD, Johnson RJ, Fleming BC, Renström PA, Nichols CE, Pope MH, Haugh LD (1994) The measurement of elongation of anterior cruciate-ligament grafts in vivo. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76(4):520–531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Figueroa D, Calvo R, Vaisman A, Meleán P, Figueroa F (2010) Effect of tendon tensioning: an in vitro study in porcine extensor tendons. Knee 17(3):245–248CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee CH, Huang GS, Chao KH, Wu SS, Chen Q (2005) Differential pretensions of a flexor tendon graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison in a porcine knee model. Arthroscopy 21(5):540–546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aune AK, Holm I, Risberg MA, Jensen HK, Steen H (2001) Four-strand hamstring tendon autograft compared with patellar tendon-bone autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A randomized study with two-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 29(6):722–728PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Feller JA, Webster KE (2003) A randomized comparison of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 31(4):564–573PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morrison JB (1969) Function of the knee joint in various activities. Biomed Eng 4(12):573–580PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Morrison JB (1970) The mechanics of the knee joint in relation to normal walking. J Biomech 3:51–61CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hahn JM, Inceoğlu S, Wongworawat MD (2014) Biomechanical comparison of Krackow locking stitch versus nonlocking loop stitch with varying number of throws. Am J Sports Med 42(12):3003–3008CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fujii M, Furumatsu T, Miyazawa S, Okada Y, Tanaka T, Ozaki T, Abe N (2015) Intercondylar notch size influences cyclops formation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(4):1092–1099CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ciccone WJ 2nd, Bratton DR, Weinstein DM, Elias JJ (2006) Viscoelasticity and temperature variations decrease tension and stiffness of hamstring tendon grafts following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88(5):1071–1078CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Graf BK, Vanderby R Jr, Ulm MJ, Rogalski RP, Thielke RJ (1994) Effect of preconditioning on the viscoelastic response of primate patellar tendon. Arthroscopy 10(1):90–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Guillard C, Lintz F, Odri GA, Vogeli D, Colin F, Collon S, Chappard D, Gouin F, Robert H (2012) Effects of graft pretensioning in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(11):2208–2213CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Krackow KA, Thomas SC, Jones LC (1986) A new stitch for ligament-tendon fixation. Brief note. J Bone Joint Surg Am 68(5):764–766CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jassem M, Rose AT, Meister K, Indelicato PA, Wheeler D (2001) Biomechanical analysis of the effect of varying suture pitch in tendon graft fixation. Am J Sports Med 29(6):734–737PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Deramo DM, White KL, Parks BG, Hinton RY (2008) Krackow locking stitch versus nonlocking premanufactured loop stitch for soft-tissue fixation: a biomechanical study. Arthroscopy 24(5):599–603CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Elias JJ, Rai SP, Ciccone WJ 2nd (2008) In vitro comparison of tension and stiffness between hamstring tendon and patella tendon grafts. J Orthop Res 26(11):1506–1511CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sakaguchi K, Tachibana Y, Oda H (2012) Biomechanical properties of porcine flexor tendon fixation with varying throws and stitch methods. Am J Sports Med 40(7):1641–1645CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    McKeon BP, Heming JF, Fulkerson J, Langeland R (2006) The Krackow stitch: a biomechanical evaluation of changing the number of loops versus the number of sutures. Arthroscopy 22(1):33–37CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jisa KA, Williams BT, Jaglowski JR, Turnbull TL, LaPrade RF, Wijdicks CA (2016) Lack of consensus regarding pretensioning and preconditioning protocols for soft tissue graft reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(9):2884-2891CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masataka Fujii
    • 1
  • Takayuki Furumatsu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Shinichi Miyazawa
    • 1
  • Takaaki Tanaka
    • 1
  • Hiroto Inoue
    • 1
  • Yuya Kodama
    • 1
  • Kenji Masuda
    • 2
  • Noritaka Seno
    • 2
  • Toshifumi Ozaki
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryOkayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmaceutical SciencesOkayamaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic SurgerySumitomo Besshi HospitalNiihamaJapan

Personalised recommendations