Meniscus Allograft Transplantation

Belkin, Nicole S.; Sennett, Brian J.; Carey, James L.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-8486-8_5

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[5][6][7] A good replacement material must also provide biomechanical properties comparative to that of native meniscus. [9][10][11][12][13][14] Although there is an increase in the use of meniscus worldwide, there is still a lack clinical and scientific focus on aspects such as finite element models and biomechanical analysis of meniscal allografts. Allogeneic meniscus has been said to provide good biomechanical properties, but the best method of its preservation remains to be determined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cryopreservation versus fresh frozen meniscal allograft: A biomechanical comparative analysis

Ahmad

Singh

Hussein

2017

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meniscal allograft transplantation may be a better alternative for the treatment of irreparable meniscal injury compared to other forms of treatment. However, it remains to be seen whether the use fresh frozen allograft is better than cryopreserved allograft in treating this type of injury. We hypothesized that cryopreserved meniscal allograft would work better in maintaining the original biomechanical properties compared to fresh frozen ones, due to the lower amount of damage it incurs during the storage process. We examined young and healthy human menisci obtained from orthopedic oncology patients who underwent resection surgeries around the knee. The menisci obtained were preserved via cryopreservation and deep-freezing process. Traction tests were carried out on the menisci after 6 weeks of preservation. Twelve pairs ( N = 24) of menisci were divided equally into two groups, cryopreservation and deep frozen. There were six males and six female menisci donors for this study. The age range was between 15 and 35 years old (24.9 ± 8.6 years). Cryopreserved specimens had a higher ultimate tensile strength (UTS; 8.2 ± 1.3 Mpa vs. 13.3 ± 1.7 Mpa: p < 0.05) and elastic modulus (61.7 ± 27.6 Mpa vs. 87.0 ± 44.10 Mpa: p < 0.05) compared to the fresh frozen specimens. There was a significant difference in UTS ( p < 0.05) between the two groups but no significant difference in their elastic modulus ( p > 0.05). The elastic modulus of the preserved meniscus was similar to fresh normal menisci taken from other studies (60-120 Mpa; cryopreserved (87.0 ± 44.1) and fresh frozen (61.7 ± 27.5)). Cryopreserved menisci had a higher elastic modulus and point of rupture (UTS) compared to fresh frozen menisci. Cryopreservation proved to be a significantly better method of preservation, among the two methods of preservation in this study.

show abstract