Cortical Screw Post Femoral Fixation Using Whipstitches, Fabric Loop, or Endobutton: The Universal Salvage

Published on 11/04/2015 by admin

Filed under Orthopaedics

Last modified 22/04/2025

Print this page

rate 1 star rate 2 star rate 3 star rate 4 star rate 5 star
Your rating: none, Average: 0 (0 votes)

This article have been viewed 1326 times

Chapter 32 Cortical Screw Post Femoral Fixation Using Whipstitches, Fabric Loop, or Endobutton

The Universal Salvage

Biomechanics

The technique uses rigid cortical bone for anchorage. This has been shown to be the most important factor in producing high-stiffness fixation.7 The stiffness is reduced slightly by the length of the construct, but the rigidity of the cortical bone7 has been shown to more than compensate. A fabric or suture interface has been associated with high-stability ACLR,811 as have whipstitches if properly implanted.1214 Both are described here in conjunction with cortical screw post fixation.

Advantages

We no longer use the femoral screw post through a second incision as a primary method because we have had success using the one-incision Endobutton method. However, we still believe that the two-incision technique has a number of advantages.

3 It allows odd-numbered strand grafts such as triple semitendinosus (3ST), 3ST/1 gracilis (Gr), and 3ST/2Gr,2 grafts that cannot be looped as a quadruple graft with the use of cross-pins.

The only disadvantage to this technique is that it requires a second incision. However, this disadvantage is usually primarily in the mind of the surgeon. We, and others, have never found the use of a small second incision to be of concern to the patient (see Chapter 49). Furthermore, the incision does not need to be large. Some may dislike the fact that a nonbioabsorbable and nonradiolucent screw remains in the patient. However, we have never seen one of these screws back out, nor have we ever seen one bother the patient2 because the screw sits flush on cortical bone under a thick muscular layer. Plus, because they are metadiaphyseal, they are far enough from the joint to not interfere with subsequent magnetic resonance images (MRIs).

Surgical Technique

Attaching the Graft to the Femoral Post

There are four methods by which this may be successfully accomplished, all of which we have used. We prefer number four. Numbers one and four require an Endobutton-CL to be available. If it is not available, then method two or three may be used, and both are very satisfactory.

1 Endobutton-CL Fabric Loop Passed around the Femoral Post

This is the most difficult technique for properly positioning the graft, but it does have the advantage of being the only technique of the four described that does not require the tying of knots for those who perceive a knot as a possible weak link (which we have not found it to be). The femoral tunnel should be drilled in the appropriate location by an inside-out or outside-in technique. The 3.2-mm drill bit for the femoral screw should be drilled a distance of at least 1.5 cm from the femoral tunnel. This will result in at least a 1-cm bone bridge between the femoral tunnel and the screw when the 6.5-mm cancellous screw and smooth washer are screwed in. The screw should be angled slightly away from the femoral tunnel to further prevent the loop from slipping over the washer and screw. The two-thirds threaded screw should be advanced until all threads are buried into the femur, leaving only smooth screw shank exposed.

At the back table or Mayo stand, the graft should be placed through the Endobutton-CL loop and then #5 braided nonabsorbable sutures passed through the Endobutton eyelets. These sutures are used to pass the construct through the knee and out of the femoral tunnel into plain view. The loop is passed over the screw head and washer, and the screw is tightened down. The Endobutton will lie between the screw and the femoral tunnel and will not interfere with fixation.

The length of the loop should be calculated in advance to allow the graft to sit where desired in the knee in a proximal-distal direction. This must take into account the size of the bone bridge between the shank of the screw and the opening of the femoral tunnel as well as the diameter of the screw. Added to this should be the amount of length the surgeon wishes the graft to be recessed within the femoral tunnel from its outer opening. The graft should be clearly marked circumferentially before implantation at a distance of 2 cm from each end with a marking pen. As long as these marks are not visible arthroscopically the surgeon can be sure there is at least 2 cm of graft in each tunnel. The graft should also be marked with a 3-O or 4-O, violet-colored, absorbable monofilament suture that is used to tie the strands together in the middle of the graft. This suture serves the dual purpose of preventing the graft from sliding along the loop when tensioning and tibial fixation are carried out and also allows the surgeon a visible guide point for what should be the approximate intraarticular midpoint of the graft.

With a long 2ST/2Gr graft this method is highly satisfactory because there is enough length to have more graft than is needed in each tunnel; usually 3 cm in each tunnel is a reasonable goal. If the measurements are off slightly after the graft is tightened down, the graft does not need to be adjusted. If the end result is too little graft in one of the tunnels by the surgeon’s standards, then the graft can be withdrawn out the tibial tunnel and passed through again using a shorter or longer Endobutton-CL loop. With the shorter 4ST graft this method is still usually satisfactory but requires more precision. A minimal length of 15 mm of graft in the tunnels appears to be adequate.15,16

3 Whipstitch Technique

In this technique the four-strand graft, if it is used, may be made into four single strands of graft of equal length. #2 braided, nonabsorbable whipstitches are then woven into each of the eight ends as described in Chapter 42.

It is of paramount importance that all the sutures are woven in very tightly with strong tension after every pass or every other pass of the suture to maximally tighten the weave so that no tightening of the weave will occur later. Again, the graft should be marked with both a marker and suture, as in method 1. The sutures are then tied, two by two, around a cancellous screw and washer (Fig. 32-1) as follows: Each double suture strand is brought up to the smooth screw shank and crossed around the far side of the screw. These ends are then pulled back and tied two by two, such that the knot is on the graft side of the screw for the first two graft limbs. The process is repeated for the other two graft limbs. This will result in two knots in the femoral post. It is important to keep track of which sutures correspond to which graft segment either by using different color sutures or marking or knotting the suture ends before passing the graft segments.

Fixating Single Strands of Graft and Odd Numbers of Strands

Double-length strands that are looped over a femoral fixation device are now the mainstay of autograft and allograft ACL soft tissue femoral fixation. However, single strands may also be used in combination with double strands or other single strands to fashion a variety of grafts. The goal is to have a graft of sufficient strength to provide good stability using the available tissue. Reports of excellent stability now exist for three-, four-, five-, six-, and eight-strand grafts (see Chapter 17). These variegated grafts may be used with any of the four fixation methods described earlier. For an added single strand of graft, whipstitches of braided #2 nonabsorbable suture should be implanted. Then the two ends can be tied one to one either around the Endobutton-CL fabric loop (methods 1 and 4), the Dacron tape (method 2), or the femoral screw itself (method 3).

The Femoral Post Technique Can Salvage the Following Situations

References

1 Prodromos CC, Joyce BT. Five-strand hamstring ACL reconstruction: a new technique with better long-term stability than four-strand. Presented at the 2006 meeting of the Mid-America Orthopaedic Association, San Antonio, TX, April, 2006. 2006.

2 Prodromos CC, Joyce BT. Five-strand hamstring ACL reconstruction: a new technique with better long-term stability than four-strand. Presented at the 2006 meeting of the Arthroscopy Association of North America, Hollywood, FL, May, 2006. 2006.

3 Goradia VK, Grana WA. A comparison of outcomes at 2 to 6 years after acute and chronic anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using hamstring tendon grafts. Arthroscopy. 2001;17:383-392.

4 Howell SM, Deutsch ML. Comparison of endoscopic and two-incision techniques for reconstructing a torn anterior cruciate ligament using hamstring tendons. Arthroscopy. 1999;15:594-606.

5 Hamada M, Shino K, Horibe S, et al. Preoperative anterior knee laxity did not influence postoperative stability restored by anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2000;16:477-482.

6 Maeda A, Shino K, Horibe S, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with multistranded autogenous semitendinosus tendon. Am J Sports Med. 1996;24:504-509.

7 To JT, Howell SM, Hull ML. Contributions of femoral fixation methods to the stiffness of anterior cruciate ligament replacements at implantation. Arthroscopy. 1999;15:379-387.

8 Prodromos CC, Han YS, Keller BL, et al. Stability of hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at two- to eight-year follow-up. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:138-146.

9 Cooley VJ, Deffner KT, Rosenberg TD. Quadrupled semitendinosus anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 5-year results in patients without meniscus loss. Arthroscopy. 2001;17:795-800.

10 Gobbi A, Mahajan S, Zanazzo M, et al. Patellar tendon versus quadrupled bone-semitendinosus anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective clinical investigation in athletes. Arthroscopy. 2003;19:592-601.

11 Gobbi A, Tuy B, Mahajan S, et al. Quadrupled bone-semitendinosus anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a clinical investigation in a group of athletes. Arthroscopy. 2003;19:691-699.

12 Feller JA, Webster KE. A randomized comparison of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31:564-573.

13 Howell SM, Deutsch ML. Comparison of endoscopic and two-incision techniques for reconstructing a torn anterior cruciate ligament using hamstring tendons. Arthroscopy. 1999;15:594-606.

14 Goradia VK, Grana WA. A comparison of outcomes at 2 to 6 years after acute and chronic anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using hamstring tendon grafts. Arthroscopy. 2001;17:383-392.

15 Zantop T, Brucker P, Bell K, et al. The effect of tunnel-graft length on the primary and secondary stability in ACL reconstruction: a study in a goat model. Presented at the 2006 meeting of the European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, and Arthroscopy,Innsbruck, Australia, May, 2006. 2006.

16 Yamazaki S, Yasuda K, Tomita F, et al. The effect of intraosseous graft length on tendon-bone healing in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using flexor tendon. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14:1086-1093.