Tibial tunnel widening after hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: Comparison between Rigidfix and bio-Transfix

Choi, Nam-Hong; Yoo, Soon-Young; Victoroff, Brian N.

doi:10.1016/j.knee.2012.05.009

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our series of patients comparing Transfix and Rigidfix, we report no significant difference in the favourable clinical outcome despite differences in biomechanical properties between the two devices. This is in agreement with other studies which do not show any clinical difference between the different femoral fixation devices [4][5][6]21,22 . The ultimate load to failure leading to breakage of cross-pins for Rigidfix and Transfix has been reported to be 737 N and 746 N respectively which exceeds the estimated strength of the ACL required for activities of daily living at 454 N. This could explain the lack of difference in clinical outcome 3,23 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Despite having differing mechanical properties, there have been no significant differences in clinical outcome between the different fixation methods in studies comparing Rigidfix with a bio-absorbable interference screw and Endobutton, and bioabsorbable interference screw 4,5 . However, there is a paucity of clinical data comparing the clinical outcome of the two transfemoral fixation devices with one published study by Choi et al (2013) 6 comparing Rigidfix with Transfix which reported an increase in tibial tunnel widening with Rigidfix without a difference in clinical outcome.…”

Section: Proceedings Of Singapore Healthcarementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Two Methods of Femoral Hamstring Graft Pin Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Puah

Wong

Yeo

et al. 2013

Proceedings of Singapore Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The outcome of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with hamstring grafts depends on early rehabilitation and secure graft fixation. Various devices available for graft fixation at the femoral tunnel have different biomechanical properties as demonstrated on cadaveric studies. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes in patients using either of two methods of transfemoral pin fixation for hamstring grafts in ACL reconstruction. Twenty-eight patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft with either transfemoral expansion fixation (Rigidfix) or cortical-cancellous suspension (Transfix) by a single surgeon were analysed including subjective knee scores and objective measurements including range of motion and arthrometer-measured anterior translation. Transfix was used in 14 (50.0%) patients and Rigidfix was used in 14 (50.0%) patients. There was no significant difference in pre-injury Tegner activity scores, pre-operative Tegner activity scores, Lysholm scores and age or in Tegner post-operative activity scores, Lysholm scores, range of motion, Lachman and pivot scores absolute anterior translation and anterior translation compared to the nonoperated knee at two years. There was a significant improvement in Tegner (2.6 ± 2.4, p<0.00) and Lysholm (25.3 ± 21.2, p<0.00) scores at two years with no significant difference between the two groups. One patient had a broken Transfix cross-pin 13 months after surgery which presented as a subcutaneous swelling which was removed. Although the biomechanical properties of Rigidfix and Transfix differ as demonstrated in cadaveric studies, both devices had similar favourable clinical outcomes in our series.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Proceedings Of Singapore Healthcarementioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Two Methods of Femoral Hamstring Graft Pin Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Puah

Wong

Yeo

et al. 2013

Proceedings of Singapore Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to these authors, the ultimate failure load might be notably decreased if whipstitches are not performed on the graft. RigidFix has been reported to be strong enough to avoid failure and secure enough to resist slippage under cyclic loading during early rehabilitation 5) . Noyes et al 17) and Morrison 18) noted that the degree of intensity which is needed for the ACL would be approximately 450 N for maintaining the activities of daily living.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…RigidFix (DePuy Mitek, Raynham, MA, USA) is composed of two cross-pins that increase the interface area between the graft and the walls of the tunnel. Many reports have shown good results of RigidFix 4 , 5) . However, there are some potential issues such as graft slippage and pin breakage that should be considered in such a fixation mechanism 6 , 7) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

One-Year Serial Follow-up Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of RigidFix for Femoral Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Noh

Lee

2017

Knee Surg Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo assess graft slippage at the site of femoral fixation by follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with a four-strand autogenous hamstring tendon using RigidFix (DePuy Mitek).Materials and MethodsTwenty-one subjects diagnosed with ACL rupture underwent ACL reconstruction using hamstring autograft with the transtibial technique. RigidFix was used for femoral fixation and Intrafix and washer screw were used for tibial fixation. Follow-up MRIs were taken immediately after surgery and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Slippage of the graft and breakage of the RigidFix cross-pin were assessed. Side-to-side difference (SSD) on stress radiographs was measured to assess residual laxity.ResultsMean slippage of the graft was 0.21±0.31 mm at one year after surgery. Cross-pin breakage was noted in two subjects: in one subject, immediately after surgery and in the other subject, at 6 months after surgery. Mean SSD was 1.32±1.07 mm at the last follow-up. The correlation coefficient between graft slippage and SSD was 0.131 (p=0.571).ConclusionsRigidFix is a stable fixation device for hamstring autograft with minimally statistically significant but clinically insignificant graft slippage. Cross-pin breakage did not affect the clinical outcomes. Careful preparation of the graft is needed for performing the technique correctly.

show abstract

“…Several biomechanical and clinical studies have shown that femoral cross-pin and tibial Intrafix or Bio-intrafix devices provide increased strength and stiffness to the graft fixation. 2,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] In this study, we evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes of the knee joint after ACL reconstruction with hamstring graft, fixed with femoral cross pin (Rigid-fix) and tibial Bio-intrafix devices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ACL reconstruction using femoral Rigid-fix and tibial Bio-intrafix devices

Singh

Trıpathy

Naik

et al. 2017

Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Tibial tunnel widening after hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: Comparison between Rigidfix and bio-Transfix

Cited by 11 publications

References 19 publications

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Two Methods of Femoral Hamstring Graft Pin Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Two Methods of Femoral Hamstring Graft Pin Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

One-Year Serial Follow-up Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of RigidFix for Femoral Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

ACL reconstruction using femoral Rigid-fix and tibial Bio-intrafix devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About