Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21(05): 391-399
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-07-10-0095
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

A biomechanical comparison of six different double loop configurations for use in the lateral fabella suture technique

A. M. Wallace
1   Queens Veterinary School Hospital, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
,
E. D. Cutting
1   Queens Veterinary School Hospital, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
,
M. P. F. Sutcliffe
2   Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
,
S. J. Langley-Hobbs
1   Queens Veterinary School Hospital, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 08 October 2007

Accepted 26 April 2007

Publication Date:
21 December 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Six different double loop configurations which could be applied to the lateral fabella suture (LFS) technique were subjected to in vitro mechanical testing. Three double loop, single strand and three double loop, double strand configurations were tested. The strongest configuration, with a significantly higher mean ultimate load and load at yield, was the interlocking loop configuration. This is a novel configuration which has not previously been reported. The three double loop, single strand configurations all had higher mean ultimate loads than the double loop, double strand configurations. The double strand group with uneven loop length performed very poorly, with significantly lower mean stiffness and ultimate load than all of the single strand groups. This group also developed unacceptably high levels of elongation during high level cyclic loading.

Keywords

Cranial cruciate ligament - double loop - Securos® - crimp tubes - Mechanical testing
 

  • References

  • 1 Innes JF, Bacon D, Lynch C. et al. Long term outcome of surgery for dogs with cranial cruciate ligament deficiency. Vet Rec 2000; 147: 325-328.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Lampman TJ, Lund EM, Lipowitz AJ. Cranial cruciate disease: current status of diagnosis, surgery, and risk for disease. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 16: 122-126.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Leighton RL. Preferred method of repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs: A survery of ACVS Diplomates specialising in canine orthopaedics. Vet Surg 1999; 28: 194.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Piermattei DL, Flo GL, De Camp CE. The stifle joint.. In: Brinker, Piermattei and Flo’s Handbook of Small Animal Orthopedics and Fracture Repair. 4thed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2006: 587-632.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Olmstead ML. The use of orthopedic wire as a lateral suture for stifle stabilization. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1993; 23: 735-753.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Korvick DL, Johnson AL, Schaeffer DJ. Surgeon’s preferences in treating cranial cruciate ligament ruptures in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1994; 205: 1318-1324.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Moore KW, Read RA. Rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs - Part II. Diagnosis and management. Comp Cont Ed 1996; 18: 381-391.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Metelman LA, Schwarz PD, Salman M. et al. An evaluation of three different surgical stabilisation procedures as they relate to postoperative meniscal injuires. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1995; 8: 118-123.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Schulz K. Diseases of the joints.. In: Small Animal Surgery. 3rd ed. Fossum TW (ed). Mosby St Louis: Elsevier; 2007: 1143-1315.
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Securos online catalogue:. http://www.securos.com. Last accessed February 12,2008.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Veterinary Instrumentation online catalogue:. http://www.vetinst.com. Last accessed February 12,2008.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 McKee WM, Miller A. A self locking knot for lateral fabellotibial suture stabilisation of the cranial cruciate ligament deficient stifle in the dog. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1999; 12: 78-80.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Vasseur PB. The stifle joint.. In: Textbook of Small Animal Surgery. 3rd ed. Slatter D(Ed). Philadelphia: WB. Saunders; 2003: 2090-2133.
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Sandman KM, Harari J. Canine cruciate ligament repair techniques: is one best?. Vet Med 2001; 96: 850-856.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Moores AP, Beck AL, Jespers KJM. et al. Mechanical evaluation of two loop tensioning methods for crimp clamp extracapsular stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament-deficient canine stifle. Vet Surg 2006; 35: 476-479.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Caporn TM, Roe SC. Biomechanical evaluation of the suitability of monofilament nylon fishing and leader line for extra-articular stabilisation of the canine cruciate deficient stifle. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1996; 9: 126-133.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Nwadike BS, Roe SC. Mechanical comparison of suture material and knot type used for fabello-tibial sutures. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1998; 11: 47-52.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lewis DD, Milthorpe BK, Bellenger CR. Mechanical comparison of materials used for extracapsular stabilisation of the stifle joint in dogs. Aust Vet J 1997; 75: 890-896.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Sicard GK, Hayashi K, Manley PA. Evaluation of 5 types of fishing material, 2 sterilisation methods, and a crimp-clamp system for extra-articular stabilization of the canine stifle joint. Vet Surg 2002; 31: 78-94.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Banwell MN, Kerwin SC, Hosgood G. et al. In vitro evaluation of the 18 and 36kg Securos Cranial Cruciate Ligament Repair System. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 283-288.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Anderson CC, Tomlinson JL, Daly WR. et al. Biomechanical evaluation of a crimp clamp system for loop fixation of monofilament nylon leader material used for stabilization of the canine stifle joint. Vet Surg 1998; 27: 533-539.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Peycke LE, Kerwin SC, Hosgood G. et al. Mechanical comparison of six loop fixation methods with monofilament nylon leader line. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2002; 15: 210-214.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Moores AP, Beck AL, Jespers KJM. et al. Mechanical evaluation of two crimp clamp systems for extracapsular stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament-deficient canine stifle. Vet Surg 2006; 35: 470-475.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Holmlund DEW. Knot properties of surgical suture materials. Acta Chir Scand 1974; 140: 355-362.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Rosin E, Robinson GM. Knot security of suture materials. Vet Surg 1989; 18: 269-273.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Tera H, Aberg C. Tensile strengths of twelve types of knot employed in surgery, using different suture materials. Acta Chir Scand 1976; 142: 1-7.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Thacker JG, Rodeheaver G, Moore JW. et al. Mechanical performance of surgical sutures. Am J Surg 1975; 130: 374-380.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Huber DJ, Egger EL, James SP. The effect of knotting method on the structural properties of large diameter nonabsorbable monofilament sutures. Vet Surg 1999; 28: 260-267.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Coetzee GL. An in vitro comparison of two replacement techniques utilising fascia lata after cranial cruciate ligament transection in the dog. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1993; 6: 85-92.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Butler DL, Hulse DA, Kay MD. et al. Biomechanics of cranial cruciate ligament reconstruction in the dog. 2. Mechanical properties. Vet Surg 1983; 12: 113-118.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Bruchman WC, Bolton CW, Bain JR. Design considerations for cruciate ligament prostheses.. In: The Anterior Cruciate Deficient Knee, New concepts in Ligament Repair. St Louis: Mosby; 1987: 254-272.
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Hyman W, Hulse D, Saunders B. et al. Strain analysis of femoral and tibial anchorage sites for extraarticular reconstruction of the cranial cruciate deficient stifle joint. 28th Veterinary Orthopedic Society Annual Conference, Chateau Lake Louise. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2001; 14: A6-32A.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32A Roe SC, Kue J, Gemma J. Isometry of potential suture attachment sites for the cranial cruciate ligament deficient canine stifle. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 215-220.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Banwell MN, Hosgood G, Hedlund CS. et al. In vitro evaluation of fluorocarbon leader line for use as a fabella-tibial suture. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2004; 17: 35-40.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Budsberg SC, Vestraete MC, Soutas-Little RW. et al. Force plate analysis before and after stabilisation of canine stifles for cruciate injury. Am J Vet Res 1988; 49: 1522-1524.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 McCartney WT, O’Connor JV, McCann WM. Incidence of infection and premature crimp failure after repair of cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifles in 110 dogs. Vet Rec 2007; 161: 232-233.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Vianna ML, Roe SC. Mechanical comparison of two knots and two crimp systems for securing nylon line used for extra-articular stabilization of the canine stifle. Vet Surg 2006; 25: 567-572.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Patterson RH, Smith GK, Gregor TP. et al. Biomechanical stability of four cranial cruciate ligament repair techniques in the dog. Vet Surg 1991; 20: 85-90.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Hulse DA, Butler DL, Kay MD. et al. Biomechanics of cranial cruciate ligament reconstruction in the dog. 1. In vitro laxity testing. Vet Surg 1983; 12: 109-112.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar