...
首页> 外文期刊>Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine >Tape versus Suture - A Biomechanical and Clinical Analysis in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair of Large Tears
【24h】

Tape versus Suture - A Biomechanical and Clinical Analysis in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair of Large Tears

机译:胶带与缝合-关节镜旋转大眼泪修复的生物力学和临床分析

获取原文

摘要

Objectives: Clinical studies have shown that repairs of larger rotator cuff tears are less likely to re-tear than repairs of smaller and partial thickness tears. Clinical studies have also shown that rotator cuff repair with an arthroscopic tension band technique have a lower re-tear rate at six months and two years post-surgery compared to simple suture-anchor technique, probably due to higher compression at the tendon-bone interface (footprint). Advances in suture anchor systems have allowed a wider tape to be used for rotator cuff repairs. Therefore the aims of this study were 1) to determine if there is any biomechanical and/or clinical benefits of using fibertape versus #2 suture in arthroscopic repair of large full thickness rotator cuff tears. Methods: Rotator cuff tears of the infraspinatus tendon were created in 16 ovine shoulders. The tendons were re-attached to the footprint using a tension band repair technique with two different types of sutures: 1) #2 suture (Fiberwire, Arthrex) or 2) tape (FiberTape, Arthrex) with an inverted mattress single row configuration using the same knotless anchor (Swivel-lock, Arthrex) system. Following repair, footprint contact pressure was measured with 10, 20, 30 N applied to the repaired tendon and at -10deg, 0deg, 10deg of abduction. Repair strength was determined by a pull-to-failure test. A retrospective analysis of prospectively assessed consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with full thickness tears larger than 1.5cm x 1cm by a single surgeon. There were 50 patients in the tape repair group and 100 patients in the suture repair group. Patients ranked pain and functional scores, shoulder strength and range of motion were recorded pre and post-operatively at one, six, 12 and six months. Ultrasound was used to evaluate the repair integrity at six months post-surgery. Results: Rotator cuff repair using tape had higher footprint contact pressure (0.33MPa ± 0.03MPa vs 0.11MPa ± 0.3MPa, p<0.0001, mean ± SEM) compared to repair with #2 sutures at 0° abduction with a 30 N load applied across the repaired tendon. Ultimate failure load of tape repair was higher than suture repair (217 ± 28 N vs 144 ± 14 N, p < 0.05). Clinical data showed both group reported significantly lower frequency and magnitude of pain during overhead activity and sleep at six months compared to pre-surgery levels (p<0.001). At six months post-surgery the suture repair group had better internal rotation (+3 vertebral levels) and external rotation (+18deg) compared to the tape repair group (p<0.001). Both groups had similar shoulder strength at six months. The re-tear rate was similar between the tape group (16%) (8/ 50) and the suture group (17%) (17/100). Conclusion: The biomechanical study showed that rotator cuff tears repaired with inverted mattress knotless single row constructs with tape increased the tendon-bone footprint compression three fold and the construct strength 1.5 fold compared to repairs performed with suture. The biomechanical advantages of tape did not, however, translate to clinical benefits with both constructs resulting in relatively good healing rates in patients with large cuff tears. Patients repaired with tape, however, were stiffer in internal and external shoulder rotation at six months.
机译:目的:临床研究表明,修复较大的肩袖撕裂比撕裂较小和部分厚度的撕裂更不易撕裂。临床研究还表明,与简单的缝合锚固技术相比,采用关节镜张力带技术进行的肩袖修复术在术后六个月和两年内的再撕裂率较低,这可能是由于腱-骨界面处的压力更高(脚印)。缝线锚固系统的发展已使更宽的胶带可用于肩袖修复。因此,本研究的目的是1)确定使用纤维胶带和2号缝合线进行大口径全袖套撕裂的关节镜修复是否有任何生物力学和/或临床益处。方法:在16个绵羊的肩膀上产生肌腱下肌腱的肩袖撕裂。使用张力带修复技术通过两种不同类型的缝合线将筋腱重新附着到足印上:1)#2缝合线(Fiberwire,Arthrex)或2)胶带(FiberTape,Arthrex),使用倒置床垫单排配置相同的无结锚(旋转锁,Arthrex)系统。修复后,在修复后的肌腱上施加10、20、30 N的外展力,并在-10°,0°,10°外展时测量脚印接触压力。修复强度通过失效测试确定。对前瞻性评估的连续患者进行回顾性分析,这些患者由一名外科医生进行了关节镜下肩袖修复,全层撕裂大于1.5cm x 1cm。胶带修复组有50例患者,缝线修复组有100例患者。分别在术后1、6、12和6个月记录患者的疼痛和功能评分,肩膀力量和运动范围。超声用于评估术后六个月的修复完整性。结果:与使用#2缝合线在0°外展并施加30 N载荷的情况下进行修复相比,使用胶带对肩袖进行修复具有更高的覆盖面积接触压力(0.33MPa±0.03MPa对0.11MPa±0.3MPa,p <0.0001,平均值±SEM)穿过修复的肌腱。胶带修复的最终失效负荷高于缝合修复(217±28 N和144±14 N,p <0.05)。临床数据显示,与手术前相比,两组的日常活动和六个月睡眠期间的疼痛发生频率和幅度均显着降低(p <0.001)。手术后六个月,缝线修复组的内旋度(+3个椎骨水平)和外旋度(+18度)比带子修补组更好(p <0.001)。两组在六个月时的肩部力量相似。胶带组(16%)(8/50)和缝合线组(17%)(17/100)之间的再撕裂率相似。结论:生物力学研究表明,与缝合缝合相比,倒置无结单排带状胶带修复的肩袖撕裂使肌腱-骨足迹压缩增加3倍,结构强度增加1.5倍。然而,两种构造物的胶带的生物力学优势均未转化为临床益处,从而导致袖口大的患者具有相对较好的治愈率。然而,用胶带修复的患者在六个月内肩部内外旋转变得僵硬。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号