An Increased Allograft Width for Circumferential Labral Reconstruction Better Restores Distractive Stability of the Hip: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Analysis

Abstract

Background: Questions remain about whether circumferential labral reconstruction (CLR) using an iliotibial band (ITB) allograft can effectively restore the labral suction seal of the hip. Hypotheses: (1) CLR with an ITB allograft >6.5 mm would restore distractive stability force to that of the intact labrum. (2) CLR with an ITB allograft >6.5 mm would achieve significantly superior distractive stability force compared with CLR with an ITB allograft <6.5 mm. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 6 fresh-frozen pelves with attached femurs (n = 12 matched hemipelves) from male donors were procured and dissected free of all soft tissue, including the hip capsule but preserving the native labrum, transverse acetabular ligament, and ligamentum teres. Potted hemipelves were placed in a saline bath and securely fixed to the frame of a hydraulic testing system. A 500-N compressive load was applied, followed by femoral distraction at a rate of 5.0 mm/s until the suction seal ruptured. Force and femoral displacement were continually recorded. Force versus displacement curves were plotted, the maximum force was recorded, and the amount of femoral distraction to rupture the suction seal was determined. After intact testing, the labrum was excised, and specimens were retested using the same protocol. CLR was subsequently performed twice in a randomized fashion using (1) an ITB allograft with a width >6.5 mm (7.5-9.0 mm) and (2) an ITB allograft with a width <6.5 mm (4.5-6.0 mm). Specimens were retested after each CLR procedure. Force (in Newtons) and femoral distraction (in millimeters) required to rupture the suction seal were measured and compared between the 4 testing states (intact, deficient, CLR <6.5 mm, and CLR >6.5 mm) using repeated-measures analysis of variance. Results: On average, intact specimens required 148.4 ± 33.1 N of force to rupture the hip suction seal, which significantly decreased to 44.3 N in the deficient state ( P < .001). CLR with ITB allografts <6.5 mm did not improve the maximum force (63 ± 62 N) from the deficient state ( P = .42) and remained significantly lower than the intact state ( P < .01). CLR with ITB allografts >6.5 mm recorded significantly greater force to rupture the suction seal (135.8 ± 44.6 N) compared with both the deficient and CLR <6.5 mm states ( P < .01), with a mean force comparable with the intact labrum ( P = .59). The amount of femoral distraction to rupture the suction seal demonstrated similar findings. Conclusion: In a cadaveric model, CLR using ITB allografts >6.5 mm restored the distractive force and distance to the suction seal rupture to values comparable with hips with an intact labrum. CLR using ITB allografts >6.5 mm outperformed CLR with ITB allografts <6.5 mm, demonstrated by a significantly higher force to rupture the suction seal and increased distraction before the rupture. Clinical Relevance: The results of this cadaveric investigation suggest that using wider labral allografts during CLR will provide the distractive force required to rupture the suction seal and immediate postoperative stability of the hip, although further studies are required to determine if these results translate to improved clinical outcomes.