{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018209408194233688, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.341346153846154, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Weak Link in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: What is the Evidence for Graft Fixation Devices?

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common injury that mostly affects young adults. The mechanisms of injury and surgical treatment have been extensively studied in both the laboratory and clinical arenas; however, great controversy still exists in regards to the best surgical technique, graft choice, and graft fixation device. In the area graft fixation, multiple breakthroughs have occurred in terms of fixation devices. These devices generally fall within the broad categories of interference screw, cross-pins, or cortical-based devices. Furthermore, some of these devices are available in either metal or bioabsorbable materials, which adds to the already great variety of options. Although biomechanically these devices have been shown to be able to withstand the typical forces experienced by the ACL graft during the early phases of rehabilitation before the graft has fully incorporated into the bone, little is known about the clinical outcomes. It is well recognized that graft fixation is the weakest link in the early postoperative period after ACL reconstruction. This review of the outcomes of ACL fixation devices explores some of the evidence available for the different devices.