...
首页> 外文期刊>Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine >The Loop ’n’ Tack Knot: Biomechanical Analysis of a Novel Suture Technique for Proximal Biceps Tenodesis
【24h】

The Loop ’n’ Tack Knot: Biomechanical Analysis of a Novel Suture Technique for Proximal Biceps Tenodesis

机译:环路'n'Tack结:对近端二头肌的新型缝合技术的生物力学分析

获取原文

摘要

Background: Secure tendon grasping is critical to the success of any tenodesis procedure. Several techniques currently used for tendon grasping can result in longitudinal splitting of the tendon, causing construct failure and failure of the tenodesis. Purpose: To compare the Loop ’n’ Tack knot as a tendon-grasping technique with other common suture techniques. We investigated the biomechanical strength and mode of failure. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eleven matched pairs of proximal biceps were harvested from fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders. One tendon from each pair was stitched using 1 of 4 different techniques. The suture techniques evaluated included the Loop ’n’ Tack with 2 different types of high-strength nonabsorbable suture, a double half-racking stitch, and a Krakow stitch. Samples were cyclically loaded between 5 and 20 N for 100 cycles, followed by a pull to failure at 33 mm/s. Results: The Loop ’n’ Tack techniques were equivalent to the double half-racking and Krakow techniques for load to ultimate failure ( P = .817 and P = .984, respectively). The double half-racking technique was the stiffest construct, which was significantly greater than the second-stiffest group, the Loop ’n’ Tack method with both FiberLink suture ( P = .012) and SutureTape ( P = .002), which had greater stiffness than the Krakow group ( P & .001). The most common failure mode for the Loop ’n’ Tack stitch was suture breakage compared with the Krakow and double half-racking methods, where the most common mode of failure was suture pullout from the tendon ( P & .001). Conclusion: Biomechanical testing found that the Loop 'n’ Tack techniques had similar ultimate load to failure values when compared with the double half-racking and Krakow methods. Mode-of-failure analysis showed that the Loop 'n’ Tack construct typically failed by suture breakage, whereas the other techniques failed by suture pullout. Clinical Relevance: The Loop 'n’ Tack technique allows for secure grasping of tissue without the need for externalization of the tendon. This technique may be beneficial in compromised or poor-quality tissue without reducing overall pullout strength when compared with a standard half-racking or Krakow stitch.
机译:背景:安全肌腱抓斗对任何一个成功程序的成功至关重要。目前用于肌腱抓握的几种技术可导致肌腱的纵向分裂,导致构建故障和未发生批量生产。目的:将环路'n'钉打结与其他常见的缝合技术进行比较作为肌腱抓取技术。我们调查了生物力学强度和失败模式。研究设计:受控实验室研究。方法:从新鲜冷冻的尸体肩部收获11对近端二头肌。使用每对的一个肌腱使用4种不同的技术缝合。评估的缝合技术包括带有2种不同类型的高强度非可吸收缝合,双半架针迹和克拉科缝的缝合技术。样品在5到20n之间循环地装载100个循环,然后在33mm / s的33mm / s下拉动。结果:环路'n'粘性技术相当于双半机架和克拉科夫技术,用于负载到最终故障(p = .817和p = .984)。双半机架技术是最硬的构造,它与第二次最基本的群体显着大,是具有纤维链缝合(P = .012)和Suturetape(P = .002)的环路'n'粘性方法比克拉科夫组更加僵硬(P& .001)。与克拉科夫和双半机架的方法相比,环路'n'钉针刺的最常见的故障模式是缝合断裂,其中最常见的故障模式是从肌腱(P <.001)的缝合线拉出。结论:生物力学测试发现,与双半机架和克洛克方法相比,环路'n'粘性技术对故障值相似的终极载荷。失败模式分析表明,环路'n'粘性构造通常由缝合断裂失败,而其他技术因缝合拔出而失败。临床相关性:环路'n'钉技术允许抓住组织的固定抓住,而无需外肌腱。与标准半架或克拉科缝线相比,这种技术可能是有益的,而不会降低整体拉出强度。

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