Allograft to bone-tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: a comparison study of allograft preparation methods

Abstract The procedure of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) allograft preparation can be divided into fresh-frozen method (FF-allograft) or freeze-dried method (FD-allograft). This study aims to biomechanically and histologically compare the graft to bone tunnel integration between the two allografts...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Xiaoke Shang, Jianzhong Hu, Jin Qu, Peng Wen, Jian Li, Qi Li, Jun Zheng
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2024-11-01
Series:Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05191-z
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1846171782025838592
author Xiaoke Shang
Jianzhong Hu
Jin Qu
Peng Wen
Jian Li
Qi Li
Jun Zheng
author_facet Xiaoke Shang
Jianzhong Hu
Jin Qu
Peng Wen
Jian Li
Qi Li
Jun Zheng
author_sort Xiaoke Shang
collection DOAJ
description Abstract The procedure of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) allograft preparation can be divided into fresh-frozen method (FF-allograft) or freeze-dried method (FD-allograft). This study aims to biomechanically and histologically compare the graft to bone tunnel integration between the two allografts. In-vitro results indicated that FF-allograft and FD-allograft showed excellent biocompatibility and biomechanics, while FD-allograft showed a denser collagen fiber arrangement than FF-allograft and autograft. Then, in-vivo preformation of the FF-allograft, FD-allograft, and autograft on bone tunnel integration was evaluated via a canine ACL reconstruction model. In-vivo results indicated that no signs of infection or osteoarthritis were shown in the femur-graft-tibia complexes, but more vascularity and synovitis formed around the implanted FF-allograft. Micro-computed tomography showed that peri-graft bone in the FF-allograft group was significantly increased and remodeled compared with the FD-allograft group; Histologically, the FF-allograft group exhibited similar graft-bone tunnel healing to the FD-allograft group. Tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) staining showed significantly more osteoclasts presented in the FD-allograft group compared to the FF-allograft group. Meanwhile, a significantly higher failure load was shown in the FF-allograft group when compared with the FD-allograft group (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the FF-allograft integrated more firmly into the bone tunnel than the FD-allograft when used in ACL reconstruction.
format Article
id doaj-art-eef437cd6fbb4d849396f27c3a64d5a0
institution Kabale University
issn 1749-799X
language English
publishDate 2024-11-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
spelling doaj-art-eef437cd6fbb4d849396f27c3a64d5a02024-11-10T12:34:51ZengBMCJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research1749-799X2024-11-0119111510.1186/s13018-024-05191-zAllograft to bone-tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: a comparison study of allograft preparation methodsXiaoke Shang0Jianzhong Hu1Jin Qu2Peng Wen3Jian Li4Qi Li5Jun Zheng6Department of Orthopedic Surgery, People’s Hospital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous RegionDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South UniversityDepartment of Sports Medicine, Xiangya Hospital, Central South UniversityDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, People’s Hospital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous RegionDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Sichuan UniversityDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Sichuan UniversityDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, People’s Hospital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous RegionAbstract The procedure of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) allograft preparation can be divided into fresh-frozen method (FF-allograft) or freeze-dried method (FD-allograft). This study aims to biomechanically and histologically compare the graft to bone tunnel integration between the two allografts. In-vitro results indicated that FF-allograft and FD-allograft showed excellent biocompatibility and biomechanics, while FD-allograft showed a denser collagen fiber arrangement than FF-allograft and autograft. Then, in-vivo preformation of the FF-allograft, FD-allograft, and autograft on bone tunnel integration was evaluated via a canine ACL reconstruction model. In-vivo results indicated that no signs of infection or osteoarthritis were shown in the femur-graft-tibia complexes, but more vascularity and synovitis formed around the implanted FF-allograft. Micro-computed tomography showed that peri-graft bone in the FF-allograft group was significantly increased and remodeled compared with the FD-allograft group; Histologically, the FF-allograft group exhibited similar graft-bone tunnel healing to the FD-allograft group. Tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) staining showed significantly more osteoclasts presented in the FD-allograft group compared to the FF-allograft group. Meanwhile, a significantly higher failure load was shown in the FF-allograft group when compared with the FD-allograft group (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the FF-allograft integrated more firmly into the bone tunnel than the FD-allograft when used in ACL reconstruction.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05191-zAnterior cruciate ligamentAutograftAllograftGraft storageTendon-bone healing
spellingShingle Xiaoke Shang
Jianzhong Hu
Jin Qu
Peng Wen
Jian Li
Qi Li
Jun Zheng
Allograft to bone-tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: a comparison study of allograft preparation methods
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Anterior cruciate ligament
Autograft
Allograft
Graft storage
Tendon-bone healing
title Allograft to bone-tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: a comparison study of allograft preparation methods
title_full Allograft to bone-tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: a comparison study of allograft preparation methods
title_fullStr Allograft to bone-tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: a comparison study of allograft preparation methods
title_full_unstemmed Allograft to bone-tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: a comparison study of allograft preparation methods
title_short Allograft to bone-tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model: a comparison study of allograft preparation methods
title_sort allograft to bone tunnel integration in a canine anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model a comparison study of allograft preparation methods
topic Anterior cruciate ligament
Autograft
Allograft
Graft storage
Tendon-bone healing
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05191-z
work_keys_str_mv AT xiaokeshang allografttobonetunnelintegrationinacanineanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionmodelacomparisonstudyofallograftpreparationmethods
AT jianzhonghu allografttobonetunnelintegrationinacanineanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionmodelacomparisonstudyofallograftpreparationmethods
AT jinqu allografttobonetunnelintegrationinacanineanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionmodelacomparisonstudyofallograftpreparationmethods
AT pengwen allografttobonetunnelintegrationinacanineanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionmodelacomparisonstudyofallograftpreparationmethods
AT jianli allografttobonetunnelintegrationinacanineanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionmodelacomparisonstudyofallograftpreparationmethods
AT qili allografttobonetunnelintegrationinacanineanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionmodelacomparisonstudyofallograftpreparationmethods
AT junzheng allografttobonetunnelintegrationinacanineanteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionmodelacomparisonstudyofallograftpreparationmethods