首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Sports Medicine >Pectoralis Major Repair: A Biomechanical Analysis of Modern Repair Configurations Versus Traditional Repair Configuration
【24h】

Pectoralis Major Repair: A Biomechanical Analysis of Modern Repair Configurations Versus Traditional Repair Configuration

机译:Pectoralis主要修复:现代修复配置的生物力学分析与传统修复配置

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Background: Pectoralis major (PM) ruptures are increasingly common, and a variety of surgical techniques have been described. However, tested techniques have demonstrated diminished strength with inadequate restoration of the footprint and suture failure at relatively low loads. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to biomechanically compare PM transosseous suture repair (current gold standard) to modern PM repair techniques that use larger caliber sutures, suture tape, and unicortical button fixation (UBF). The null hypothesis was that there would be no mechanical difference between repair techniques and no difference in the amount of footprint restoration. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Twenty-four fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders controlled for age and bone mineral density were randomized equally to 4 groups: (1) UBF, suture tape; (2) UBF, No. 5 suture, suture tape; (3) bone trough with No. 2 suture; and (4) native PM tendon group; all groups were tested to failure. The specimens were tested under cycling loads (10 N to 125 N) with a final load-to-failure test at 1 mm/s. Failure modes were classified by location and cause of rupture based on optical markers, while tendon footprint length was measured to determine amount of footprint restoration. Results: For fixation strength, the mean peak load was significantly greater in the native tendon (1816 ± 706 N) versus UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape (794 ± 168 N), UBF/suture tape (502 ± 201 N), and bone trough (492 ± 151 N) ( P .001 for all). UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape featured the lowest displacement superiorly (1.09 ± 0.47 mm) and inferiorly (1.14 ± 0.39 mm) with a significant difference compared with bone trough. With regard to tendon footprint reapproximation, cortical button fixation best approximated native tendon footprint length versus bone trough. Conclusion: Based on peak failure load, the UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape construct demonstrated 61% greater construct strength than a traditional bone trough technique. Moreover, displacement after cyclic loading was by far smallest in the UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape construct. Therefore, repair constructs with larger caliber suture and suture tape provide a measurable improvement in construct strength versus traditional PM repair techniques in a biomechanical model and may be advantageous for repair. Clinical Relevance: Cortical button fixation with larger caliber suture and suture tape allows for a significantly better PM repair than more traditional techniques at the time of surgery, which may ultimately result in improved clinical outcomes if implemented in surgical practice. ]]>
机译:背景技术:胸部主要(PM)破裂越来越普遍,已经描述了各种外科手术技术。然而,测试的技术已经证明了减少的强度,并且在相对较低的载荷处的占地面积和缝合失败的恢复不足。目的/假设:目的是生物力学上比较PM传球缝合修复(当前金标准)到现代PM修复技术,使用较大的口径缝合线,缝合带和UNICRICK按钮固定(UBF)。零假设是修复技术之间没有机械差异,并且占地面积恢复量没有差异。研究设计:受控实验室研究。方法:对年龄和骨密度控制的二十四个新鲜冷冻的尸体肩部同等化至4组:(1)UBF,缝合带; (2)UBF,5号缝合,缝合带; (3)骨折2号缝合; (4)本土PM肌腱组;所有群体都被测试到失败。在循环载荷(10n至125n)下测试样品,最终载荷对损失测试以1mm / s。失效模式通过基于光学标记的破裂位置和原因来分类,而测量肌腱足迹长度以确定占地面积恢复量。结果:对于固定强度,天然肌腱(1816±706N)与UBF / NO的平均峰值载荷显着大。 5缝合/缝合胶带(794±168 n),UBF /缝合带(502±201 n)和骨槽(492±151 n)(所有适用于所有的P <.001)。 UBF / NO。 5缝合线/缝线带采用最低位移(1.09±0.47 mm),与骨头槽相比,差异(1.14±0.39毫米),与骨头槽相比具有显着差异。关于肌腱足迹重新赋予,皮质按钮固定最佳近似的天然肌腱足迹长度与骨槽。结论:基于峰值故障负载,UBF / NO。 5缝合/缝合胶带构建体展示了比传统的骨槽技术更高的构建强度更高。此外,循环负载后的位移在UBF / NO中最小。 5缝合/缝合胶带构建体。因此,具有较大口径缝合线和缝合带的修复构造提供了在生物力学模型中的构建强度与传统PM修复技术的可测量改善,并且可能是有利的。临床相关性:具有较大口径缝合线和缝合胶带的皮质按钮固定允许比手术时的传统技术更明显更好的PM维修,这可能最终导致在外科实践中实施的改善的临床结果。 ]]>

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