...
首页> 外文期刊>Arthroscopy: the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association >A biomechanical comparison of tendon-bone interface motion and cyclic loading between single-row, triple-loaded cuff repairs and double-row, suture-tape cuff repairs using biocomposite anchors
【24h】

A biomechanical comparison of tendon-bone interface motion and cyclic loading between single-row, triple-loaded cuff repairs and double-row, suture-tape cuff repairs using biocomposite anchors

机译:使用生物复合材料锚钉进行的单行,三重袖套修复与双行,缝合带绑带修复之间的腱-骨界面运动和循环载荷的生物力学比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

To compare tendon-bone interface motion and cyclic loading in a single-row, triple-loaded anchor repair with a suture-tape, rip-stop, double-row rotator cuff repair. Using 18 human shoulders from 9 matched cadaveric pairs, we created 2 groups of rotator cuff repairs. Group 1 was a double-row, rip-stop, suture-tape construct. Group 2 was a single-row, triple-loaded construct. Before mechanical testing, the supraspinatus footprint was measured with calipers. A superiorly positioned digital camera optically measured the tendon footprint motion during 60° of humeral internal and external rotation. Specimens were secured at a fixed angle not exceeding 45° in reference to the load. After preloading, each sample was cycled between 10 N and 100 N for 200 cycles at 1 Hz, followed by destructive testing at 33 mm/s. A digital camera with tracking software measured the repair displacement at 100 and 200 cycles. Ultimate load and failure mode for each sample were recorded. The exposed anterior footprint border (6.5% ± 6%) and posterior footprint border (0.9% ± 1.7%) in group 1 were statistically less than the exposed anterior footprint border (30.3% ± 17%) and posterior footprint border (29.8% ± 14%) in group 2 (P = .003 and P < .001, respectively). The maximal internal rotation and external rotation tendon footprint displacements in group 1 (1.6 mm and 1.4 mm, respectively) were less than those in group 2 (both 3.6 mm) (P = .007 and P = .004, respectively). Mean displacement after 100 cycles for group 1 and group 2 was 2.0 mm and 3.2 mm, respectively, and at 200 cycles, mean displacement was 2.5 mm and 4.2 mm, respectively (P = .02). The mean ultimate failure load in group 1 (586 N) was greater than that in group 2 (393 N) (P = .02). The suture-tendon interface was the site of most construct failures. The suture-tape, rip-stop, double-row rotator cuff repair had greater footprint coverage, less rotational footprint displacement, and a greater mean ultimate failure load than the triple-loaded, single-row repair on mechanical testing. No double-row or single-row constructs showed 5 mm of displacement after the first 100 cycles. The most common failure mode for both constructs was suture tearing through the tendon. Differences in cuff fixation influence rotational tendon movement and may influence postoperative healing. Stronger repair constructs still fail at the suture-tendon interface.
机译:为了比较单行三重锚固修复与缝合带撕裂止裂双行肩袖修复中的腱-骨界面运动和循环载荷。使用9对匹配的尸体对中的18个人类肩膀,我们创建了两组肩袖修复术。第一组是双排撕裂缝合带结构。第2组是单排三重构建体。在进行机械测试之前,用卡尺测量棘上棘的足迹。位置优越的数码相机可光学测量肱骨内外旋转60°期间的肌腱足迹运动。样品以相对于负载不超过45°的固定角度固定。预加载后,将每个样品在10 N和100 N之间以1 Hz的频率循环200个循环,然后以33 mm / s的速度进行破坏性测试。带有跟踪软件的数码相机以100和200个周期测量修复位移。记录每个样品的极限载荷和破坏模式。第一组的暴露前足印边界(6.5%±6%)和后足印边界(0.9%±1.7%)在统计学上小于暴露前足印边界(30.3%±17%)和后足印边界(29.8%± 14%)进入第2组(分别为P = .003和P <.001)。第一组的最大内旋和外旋肌腱足迹位移(分别为1.6 mm和1.4 mm)小于第二组(均为3.6 mm)(分别为P = .007和P = .004)。第1组和第2组100个循环后的平均位移分别为2.0 mm和3.2 mm,在200个循环中,平均位移分别为2.5 mm和4.2 mm(P = .02)。第一组的平均最终破坏负荷(586 N)大于第二组的平均最终破坏负荷(393 N)(P = .02)。缝线-肌腱界面是大多数构造失败的地方。与机械测试中的三重,单行修复相比,缝合带,撕裂止动,双行肩袖修复术具有更大的足迹覆盖范围,更少的旋转足迹位移和更大的平均最终破坏负荷。在前100个循环后,没有双排或单排构造显示5 mm的位移。两种结构最常见的破坏模式是缝线撕裂穿过肌腱。袖带固定的差异会影响肌腱旋转,并可能影响术后愈合。较强的修复构造仍在缝合线-肌腱界面处失效。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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