Background: Previous work has reported that increased tibial slope is directly correlated with increased anterior tibial translation, possibly predisposing patients to higher rates of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears and causing higher rates of ACL graft failures over the long term. However, the effect of changes in sagittal plane tibial slope on ACL reconstruction (ACLR) graft force has not been well defined. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to quantify the effect of changes in sagittal plane tibial slope on ACLR graft force at varying knee flexion angles. Our null hypothesis was that changing the sagittal plane tibial slope would not affect force on the ACL graft. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten male fresh-frozen cadaveric knees had a posterior tibial osteotomy performed and an external fixator placed for testing and accurate slope adjustment. Following ACLR, specimens were compressed with a 200-N axial load at flexion angles of 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, and 60°, and the graft loads were recorded through a force transducer clamped to the graft. Tibial slope was varied between −2° and 20° of posterior slope at 2° increments under these test conditions. Results: ACL graft force in the loaded testing state increased linearly as slope increased. This effect was independent of flexion angle. The final model utilized a 2-factor linear mixed-effects regression model and noted a significant, highly positive, and linear relationship between tibial slope and ACL graft force in axially loaded knees at all flexion angles tested (slope coefficient = 0.92, SE = 0.08, P < .001). Significantly higher graft force was also observed at 0° of flexion as compared with all other flexion angles for the loaded condition (all P < .001). Conclusion: The authors found that tibial slope had a strong linear relationship to the amount of graft force experienced by an ACL graft in axially loaded knees. Thus, a flatter tibial slope had significantly less loading of ACL grafts, while steeper slopes increased ACL graft loading. Our biomechanical findings support recent clinical evidence of increased ACL graft failure with steeper tibial slope secondary to increased graft loading. Clinical Relevance: Evaluation of the effect of increasing tibial slope on ACL graft force can guide surgeons when deciding if a slope-decreasing proximal tibial osteotomy should be performed before a revision ACLR. Overall, as slope increases, ACL graft force increases, and in our study, flatter slopes had lower ACL graft forces and were protective of the ACLR graft.

Background: The acetabular labrum has been found to provide a significant contribution to the distractive stability of the hip. However, the influence of labral height on hip suction seal biomechanics is not known. Hypothesis: The smaller height of acetabular labrum is associated with decreased distractive stability. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: A total of 23 fresh-frozen cadaveric hemipelvises were used in this study. Hips with acetabular dysplasia or femoroacetabular impingement–related bony morphologic features, intra-articular pathology, or no measurable suction seal were excluded. Before testing, each specimen’s hip capsule was removed, a pressure sensor was placed intra-articularly, and the hip was fixed in a heated saline bath. Labral size was measured by use of a digital caliper. Maximum distraction force, distance to suction seal rupture, and peak negative pressure were recorded while the hip underwent distraction at a rate of 0.5 mm/s. Correlations between factors were analyzed using the Spearman rho, and differences between groups were detected using Mann-Whitney U test. Results: Of 23 hips, 12 satisfied inclusion criteria. The maximum distraction force and peak negative pressure were significantly correlated ( R = −0.83; P = .001). Labral height was largely correlated with all suction seal parameters (maximum distraction force, R = 0.69, P = .013; distance to suction seal rupture, R = 0.55, P = .063; peak negative pressure, R = −0.62, P = .031). Labral height less than 6 mm was observed in 5 hips, with a mean height of 6.48 mm (SD, 2.65 mm; range, 2.62-11.90 mm; 95% CI, 4.80-8.17 mm). Compared with the 7 hips with larger labra (>6 mm), the hips with smaller labra had significantly shorter distance to suction seal rupture (median, 2.3 vs 7.2 mm; P = .010) and significantly decreased peak negative pressure (median, −59.3 vs −66.9 kPa; P = .048). Conclusion: Smaller height (<6 mm) of the acetabular labrum was significantly associated with decreased distance to suction seal rupture and decreased peak negative pressure. A new strategy to increase the size of the labrum, such as labral augmentation, could be justified for patients with smaller labra in order to optimize the hip suction seal. Clinical Relevance: The height of the acetabular labrum is correlated with hip suction seal biomechanics. Further studies are required to identify the clinical effects of labral height on hip stability.

Background: The capsular ligaments and the labral suction seal cooperatively manage distractive stability of the hip. Capsular reconstruction using an iliotibial band (ITB) allograft aims to address capsular insufficiency and iatrogenic instability. However, the extent to which this procedure may restore hip distractive stability after a capsular defect is unknown. Purpose: To evaluate the biomechanical effects of capsular reconstruction on distractive stability of the hip joint. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric hip specimens were dissected to the level of the capsule and axially distracted in 3 testing states: intact capsule, partial capsular defect, and capsular reconstruction with an ITB allograft. Each femur was compressed with 500 N of force and then distracted 6 mm relative to the neutral position at 0.5 mm/s. Distractive force was continuously recorded, and the first peak delineating 2 phases of hip distractive stability in the force-displacement curve was analyzed. Results: The median force at maximum distraction in the capsular reconstruction state (156 N) was significantly greater than that in the capsular defect state (89 N; P = .036) but not significantly different from that in the intact state (218 N; P = .054). Median values for distractive force at first peak (60 N, 72 N, and 61 N, respectively; P = .607), distraction at first peak (2.3 mm, 2.3 mm, and 2.5 mm, respectively; P = .846), and percentage decrease in distractive force (35%, 78%, and 63%, respectively; P = .072) after the first peak were not significantly different between the intact, defect, and reconstruction states. Conclusion: Capsular reconstruction with an ITB allograft significantly increased the force required to distract the hip compared with a capsular defect in a cadaveric model. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report an initial peak distractive force and to propose 2 distinct phases of hip distractive stability. Clinical Relevance: The consequences of a capsular defect on distractive stability of the hip may be underappreciated among the orthopaedic community; with that said, capsular reconstruction using an ITB allograft provided significantly increased distractive stability and should be considered an effective treatment option for patients with symptomatic capsular deficiency.

Background: Historically, radial meniscal tears were treated with partial or near-total meniscectomy, which usually resulted in poor outcomes. Radial meniscal tears function similar to a total meniscectomy and are challenging to treat. Repair of radial meniscal tears should be performed to prevent joint deterioration and the need for salvage procedures in the future. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to compare 3 repair techniques for radial tears of the medial meniscus: the 2-tunnel, hybrid, and hybrid tunnel techniques. It was hypothesized that there would be no differences among the 3 groups in regard to gapping and ultimate failure strength. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Thirty human male cadaver knees (10 matched pairs, n = 20; 10 unpaired, n = 10) were used to compare the 2-tunnel, hybrid, and hybrid tunnel repairs. A complete radial tear was made at the midbody of the medial meniscus. Repairs were performed according to the described techniques. Specimens were potted and mounted on a universal material testing machine where each specimen was cyclically loaded for 1000 cycles before experiencing a pull to failure. Gap distances at the tear site, ultimate failure load, and failure location were measured and recorded. Results: After 1000 cycles of cyclic loading, there were no significant differences in displacement among the 2-tunnel repair (3.0 ± 1.7 mm), hybrid repair (3.0 ± 0.9 mm), and hybrid tunnel repair (2.3 ± 1.0 mm; P = .4042). On pull-to-failure testing, there were also no significant differences in ultimate failure strength among the 2-tunnel repair (259 ± 103 N), hybrid repair (349 ± 149 N), and hybrid tunnel repair (365 ± 146 N; P = .26). However, the addition of vertical mattress sutures to act as a “rip stop” significantly reduced the likelihood of the sutures pulling through the meniscus during pull-to-failure testing for the hybrid and hybrid tunnel repairs (4 of 16, 25%) as compared with the 2-tunnel repair (7 of 9, 78%; P = .017). Conclusion: The results showed equivalent biomechanical testing with regard to gap distance and pull-to-failure strength among the 3 repairs. The addition of the vertical mattress sutures to act as a rip stop was effective in preventing meniscal cutout through the meniscus. Clinical Relevance: Effective healing of radial meniscal tears after repair is paramount to prevent joint deterioration and symptom development. Each tested repair showed a biomechanically equivalent and stable construct to use to repair radial meniscal tears. The authors recommend that rip stop vertical mattress sutures be used, especially in poor-quality meniscal tissue, to prevent suture cutout.

Background: Given the variety of suturing techniques for bucket-handle meniscal repair, it is important to assess which suturing technique best restores native biomechanics. Purpose/Hypothesis: To biomechanically compare vertical mattress and cross-stitch suture techniques, in single- and double-row configurations, in their ability to restore native knee kinematics in a bucket-handle medial meniscal tear model. The hypothesis was that there would be no difference between the vertical mattress and cross-stitch double-row suture techniques but that the double-row technique would provide significantly improved biomechanical parameters versus the single-row technique. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten matched pairs of human cadaver knees were randomly assigned to the vertical mattress (n = 10) or cross-stitch (n = 10) repair group. Each knee underwent 4 consecutive testing conditions: (1) intact, (2) displaced bucket-handle tear, (3) single-row suture configuration on the femoral meniscus surface, and (4) double-row suture configuration (repair of femoral and tibial meniscus surfaces). Knees were loaded with a 1000-N axial compressive force at 0°, 30°, 60°, 90°, and 120° of flexion for each condition. Resultant medial compartment contact area, average contact pressure, and peak contact pressure data were recorded. Results: Intact state contact area was not restored at 0° (P = .027) for the vertical double-row configuration and at 0° (P = .032), 60° (P < .001), and 90° (P = .007) of flexion for the cross-stitch double-row configuration. No significant differences were found in the average contact pressure and peak contact pressure between the intact state and the vertical mattress and cross-stitch repairs with single- and double-row configurations at any flexion angles. When the vertical and cross-stich repairs were compared across all flexion angles, no significant differences were observed in single-row configurations, but in double-row configurations, cross-stitch repair resulted in a significantly decreased contact area, average contact pressure, and peak contact pressure (all P < .001). Conclusion: Single- and double-row configurations of the vertical mattress and cross-stitch inside-out meniscal repair techniques restored native tibiofemoral pressure after a medial meniscal bucket-handle tear at all assessed knee flexion angles. Despite decreased contact area with a double-row configuration, mainly related to the cross-stitch repair, in comparison with the intact state, the cross-stitch double-row repair led to decreased pressure as compared with the vertical double-row repair. These findings are applicable only at the time of the surgery, as the biological effects of healing were not considered. Clinical Relevance: Medial meniscal bucket-handle tears may be repaired with the single- or double-row configuration of vertical mattress or cross-stitch sutures.