English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

ResumoObjetivoinvestigar se a fixação transversa tibial com parafuso femoral apresenta vantagens biomecânicas sobre a fixação transversa femoral com parafuso tibial na reconstrução do ligamento cruzado anterior (LCA).Métodoforam usados como modelos de testes joelhos suínos e tendões extensores digitais bovinos. Foram submetidos à reconstrução do LCA 28 joelhos: 14 foram fixados com parafuso na tíbia e implante transverso no fêmur (grupo padrão) e 14 com parafuso no fêmur e fixação transversa na tíbia (grupo invertido). Os modelos foram submetidos aos testes de tração.Resultadosnão houve diferença estatisticamente significante na sobrevivência das técnicas no que tange a força, força máxima sem falha e tensão. Houve uma sobrevivência maior no grupo padrão na comparação das curvas de tensão de limite elástico (p<0,05).Conclusãonão há vantagem biomecânica da fixação transversa tibial com parafuso femoral em relação à fixação transversa femoral com parafuso tibial, observada em testes com modelos animais.AbstractObjectiveto verify whether the combination of tibial cross pin fixation and femoral screw fixation presents biomechanical advantages when compared to femoral cross pin fixation and tibial screw fixation for the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL).Methodsthirty‐eight porcine knees, and bovine extensor digitorum tendons, were used as the graft materials. The tests were performed in three groups: 1) standard, used fourteen knees, and the grafts were fixated with the combination of femoral cross pin and a tibial screw; 2) inverted, used fourteen knees with an inverted combination of tibial cross pin and a femoral screw; 3) control, ten control tests performed with intact ACL. After the grafts fixation, all the knees were subjected to tensile testing to determine yield strength and ultimate strength.Resultsthere was no statistically significant difference in survival techniques in regard to strength, yield load and tension. There was a higher survival compared in the standard curves of yield stress (p<0.05).Conclusionthere is no biomechanical advantage, observed in animal models testing, in the combination of tibial cross pin fixation and femoral screw when compared to femoral cross pin fixation and tibial screw

Análise biomecânica da fixação tibial transversa na reconstrução do ligamento cruzado anterior