Influence of sidewall retention and interference fit in total ankle replacement on implant-bone micromotion: A finite element study

The success of uncemented total ankle replacement (TAR) is linked to initial stability because bony ingrowth depends upon limited early micromotion. Tibial implant design fixation features resist micromotion aided by bony sidewall retention and interference fit. Our goal was to investigate factors influencing implant-bone micromotion in TAR. Two TAR tibial components were virtually inserted into CT-derived computer models of two distal tibias from patients with end-stage ankle arthritis. Density-based inhomogeneous material assignment was used to model bone compaction during press-fit. Finite element analysis (FEA) was used to simulate three fixation cases: (1) no sidewalls + line-to-line fit, (2) sidewalls + line-to-line fit, and (3) sidewalls + 50, 100, or 200 µm interference fit. Kinetic profiles from the stance phase of gait were simulated and micromotions computed from FEA output. Without sidewalls or interference fit, micromotions were largest in early and late stance, with largest micromotions (averaging ~150-250 µm) observed near heel strike. Micromotions decreased 39%-62% when sidewalls were retained. When interference fit was also modeled, micromotions decreased another 37%-61% to ~10 µm. Micromotion differences between patients persisted with sidewall retention but largely disappeared with interference fit. This study presents new insights into the effects of TAR fixation features on implant-bone micromotion. Stability appeared to be influenced by surrounding bone quality, but this influence was greatly diminished when interference fit was introduced. More complete understanding of TAR implant features and performance is needed, but our results show the importance of bone quality and interference fit in the stability of uncemented TAR.

Continuous Vertical Inside-Out Versus Traditional Vertical Inside-Out Meniscal Repair: A Biomechanical Comparison

Background

Biomechanical assessment of meniscal repairs is essential for evaluating different meniscal suturing methods and techniques. The continuous meniscal suture technique is a newer method of meniscal repair that may have biomechanical differences compared with traditional techniques.

Purpose

To evaluate the displacement, stiffness after cyclical loading, and load to failure for a continuous vertical inside-out meniscal suture versus a traditional vertical inside-out meniscal suture in a porcine medial meniscus.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

A total of 28 porcine knees were acquired and divided into 2 test groups of 14 medial meniscus each. A 2.0-cm longitudinal red-white zone cut was made in the body of the medial meniscus for each knee. The continuous suture (CS) group received 4 vertical stitches performed with a continuous vertical meniscal suture technique, and the inside-out suture (IO) group received a traditional vertical suture with 4 stitches. Two traction tapes were passed between the sutures and positioned in the biomechanical testing fixture device. Each specimen underwent load-to-failure testing at 5 mm/s, and displacement, system stiffness, and maximum load to failure were compared between the groups.

Results

The displacement after the cyclic test was 0.53 ± 0.12 and 0.48 ± 0.07 mm for the CS and IO groups, respectively. There was no significant difference between the groups (P = .2792). The stiffness at the ultimate load testing was 36.3 ± 1.9 and 35.3 ± 2.4 N/mm for groups CS and IO, respectively, with no significant difference between the groups (P = .2557). In the load-to-failure test, the ultimate load was 218.2 ± 63.9 and 238.3 ± 71.3 N in the CS and IO groups, respectively, with no significant group differences (P = .3062).

Conclusion

A continuous vertical meniscal suture created a configuration for treating longitudinal meniscal lesions that was beneficial and biomechanically similar to a traditional vertical suture technique.

Clinical Relevance

The study findings indicate that use of the continuous vertical inside-out meniscal suture technique is a possible therapeutic option.

Primary Fixation and Cyclic Performance of Single-Stitch All-Inside and Inside-Out Meniscal Devices for Repairing Vertical Longitudinal Meniscal Tears

BACKGROUND

Primary device fixation and the resistance against gap formation during repetitive loading influence the quality of meniscal repair. There are limited biomechanical data comparing primary tensioning and cyclic behavior of all-inside versus inside-out repair.

HYPOTHESIS

All-inside devices provide higher initial load on the meniscal repair than inside-out fixation, and stiffer constructs show higher resistance against gap formation during cyclic loading.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

In total, 60 longitudinal bucket-handle tears in human cadaveric menisci were created and repaired with a single stitch and randomly assigned to 4 all-inside groups (TrueSpan, FastFix 360, Stryker AIR, FiberStich) and 2 inside-out groups (suture repair [IO-S], suture tape [IO-ST]). Residual load after repair tensioning (50 N) and relief displacement were measured. Constructs underwent cyclic loading between 2 and 20 N over 500 cycles (0.75 Hz) with cyclic stiffness, gap formation, and final peak elongation measured. Ultimate load and stiffness were analyzed during pull to failure (3.15 mm/s).

RESULTS

All-inside repair demonstrated significantly higher primary fixation strength than inside-out repair. The significantly highest load (mean ± SD; 20.1 ± 0.9 N; P < .037) and relief displacement (-2.40 ± 0.32 mm; P < .03) were for the knotless soft anchoring FiberStich group. The lowest initial load (9.0 ± 1.5 N; P < .001) and relief displacement (-1.39 ± 0.26 mm; P < .045) were for the IO-S repair group. The final gap formation (500th cycle) of FiberStich (0.75 ± 0.37 mm; P < .02) was significantly smaller than others and that of the IO-S (1.47 ± 0.33 mm; P < .045) significantly larger. The construct stiffness of the FiberStich and IO-ST groups was significantly greater at the end of cyclic testing (16.7 ± 0.80 and 15.5 ± 1.42 N/mm; P < .042, respectively) and ultimate failure testing (23.4 ± 3.6 and 20.6 ± 2.3 N/mm; P < .005). The FastFix 360 (86.4 ± 4.8 N) and Stryker AIR (84.4 ± 4.6 N) groups failed at a significantly lower load than the IO-S group (P < .02) with loss of anchor support. The FiberStich (146.8 ± 23.4 N), TrueSpan (142.0 ± 17.8 N), and IO-ST (139.4 ± 7.3 N) groups failed at significantly higher loads (P < .02) due to suture tearing.

CONCLUSION

Overall, primary fixation strength of inside-out meniscal repair was significantly lower than all-inside repair in this cadaveric tissue model. Although absolute differences among groups were small, meniscal repairs with higher construct stiffness (IO-ST, FiberStich) demonstrated increased resistance against gap formation and failure load.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Knotless single-stitch all-inside meniscal repair with a soft anchor resulted in less gapping, but the overall clinical significance on healing rates remains unclear.