This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanics of 4-strand and 5-strand hamstring constructs for anterior cruciate ligament grafts. Methods: Thirty-six human cadaveric hamstring grafts were tested in 3 different conditions: (1) graft femoral fixation complex, (2) graft femoral and tibial fixation (GFTF) complex using a human model, and (3) GFTF complex using a porcine model. Grafts were tested on a tensile testing machine. Four-stranded grafts served as the control group, and 5-stranded grafts served as the experimental group. Cyclic elongation, ultimate load to failure, stiffness, and diameter of the grafts were analyzed. Results: value of 13.1%, and F-significance of 0.02778). There were no significant differences in terms of ultimate load to failure, cyclic elongation, or stiffness between the experimental groups. Conclusion: Five-strand hamstring grafts offer greater diameter and are biomechanically comparable to 4-strand equivalents at time 0. Grafts >8 mm offer significantly greater stiffness compared to grafts sized <8 mm. There is a weak positive correlation between graft diameter and stiffness. Clinical Relevance: A potential drawback to hamstring grafts is their variability in size. Five-strand hamstring grafts provide increased diameter in comparison to 4-strand equivalents and might be used when quadrupled graft diameter is <8 mm.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brzezinski et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: