Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 31, 2026
A Mini-Invasive Internal Fixation Technique for Studying Immobilization-Induced Knee Flexion Contracture in Rats
Published on: May 20, 2019
The fixation strength of tibial PCL press-fit reconstructions
M Ettinger1, T Wehrhahn, M Petri
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hannover Medical School (MHH), Anna-von-Borries-Str 1-7, 30625 Hannover, Germany. Max@ettinger.info
Purpose:
A secure tibial press-fit technique in posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions is an interesting technique because no hardware is necessary. For anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, a few press-fit procedures have been published. Up to the present point, no biomechanical data exist for a tibial press-fit posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to characterize a press-fit procedure for PCL reconstruction that is biomechanically equivalent to an interference screw fixation.
Methods:
Quadriceps and hamstring tendons of 20 human cadavers (age: 49.2 ± 18.5 years) were used. A press-fit fixation with a knot in the semitendinosus tendon (K) and a quadriceps tendon bone block graft (Q) were compared to an interference screw fixation (I) in 30 porcine femora. In each group, nine constructs were cyclically stretched and then loaded until failure. Maximum load to failure, stiffness, and elongation during failure testing and cyclical loading were investigated.
Results:
The maximum load to failure was 518 ± 157 N (387-650 N) for the (K) group, 558 ± 119 N (466-650 N) for the (I) group, and 620 ± 102 N (541-699 N) for the (Q) group. The stiffness was 55 ± 27 N/mm (18-89 N/mm) for the (K) group, 117 ± 62 N/mm (69-165 N/mm) for the (I) group, and 65 ± 21 N/mm (49-82 N/mm) for the (Q) group. The stiffness of the (I) group was significantly larger (P = 0.01). The elongation during cyclical loading was significantly larger for all groups from the 1st to the 5th cycle compared to the elongation in between the 5th to the 20th cycle (P < 0.03).
Conclusion:
All techniques exhibited larger elongation during initial loading. Load to failure and stiffness was significantly different between the fixations. The Q fixation showed equal biomechanical properties compared to a pure tendon fixation (I) with an interference screw. All three fixation techniques that were investigated exhibit comparable biomechanical properties. Preconditioning of the constructs is critical. Clinical trials have to investigate the biological effectiveness of these fixation techniques.