Biomechanical analysis of four different meniscus suturing techniques for posterior meniscal root pull‐out repair: A human cadaveric study.

Purpose: To compare the biomechanical properties of the slip‐knot technique with three other transtibial pullout suture repair constructs for meniscal root tears. Method: Thirty‐two fresh‐frozen cadaveric menisci were randomly allocated to four meniscus‐suture fixation constructs: Two simple‐sutures (TSS), two slip‐knot (TSK) sutures, two cinch‐loop (TCL) sutures, and two modified Mason–Allen (TMMA) sutures. Cyclic loading from 5 to 20 N was conducted for 1000 cycles at 0.5 Hz, and then loaded to failure at 0.5 mm/s. Parametric data (displacement during cyclic loading, ultimate load, yield load, and displacement at failure) were analysed using a one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA), whereas nonparametric data (stiffness) were analysed using the Kruskal–Wallis test. Results: After 1000 cycles, the TCL construct significantly displaced the most (mean ± SD, 6.78 ± 1.32 mm; p < 0.001), followed by the TMMA (2.83 ± 0.90 mm), TSK (2.33 ± 0.57 mm), and TSS (2.03 ± 0.62 mm) groups. On ultimate failure load, there was no significant difference between the TSK group (123.48 ± 27.24 N, p > 0.05) and the other three groups (TSS, 94.65 ± 25.33 N; TMMA, 168.38 ± 23.24 N; TCL, 170.54 ± 57.32 N); however, it exhibited the least displacement (5.53 ± 1.25 mm) which was significantly shorter than those of the TCL (11.82 ± 4.25 mm, p < 0.001) and TMMA (9.53 ± 2.18 mm, p = 0.03) constructs. No significant difference in stiffness was observed among the four meniscus‐suture constructs. Conclusion: The slip‐knot technique has proven to be a simple, yet robust and stable meniscal root fixation option; moreover, it exhibited superiority over the more complex modified Mason–Allen suture construct in resisting displacement at the ultimate failure load. Level of Evidence: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]