...
【24h】

Biomechanical comparison of arthroscopically performable techniques for suprapectoral biceps tenodesis.

机译:关节镜下可用于肱二头肌腱上翻的技术的生物力学比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to biomechanically compare the cyclic and ultimate failure load (UFL) of 4 widely used techniques for arthroscopically performable suprapectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHB). METHODS: We used 28 fresh-frozen human cadaveric specimens (mean age, 65 years [range, 43 to 78 years; SD, 6.7 years]; 43% male specimens) to investigate 4 different techniques for LHB tenodesis. All techniques were performed in an open manner, with localization at the entrance of the bicipital groove. Two suture anchor techniques (Healix [DePuy Mitek, Raynham, MA], 5.5 mm, with modified lasso-loop stitch; BioSwiveLock [Arthrex, Naples, FL], 5.5 mm, with interlocking Krackow stitch) and two techniques using tenodesis screws (Bio-Tenodesis screw [Arthrex], 8 x 23 mm; Biceptor [Smith & Nephew, Andover, MA], 8 x 25 mm) were investigated. Under a 10-N preload, an axial cyclic load with 100 cycles, 1-Hz frequency, and 50-N maximum load was applied. UFL was evaluated with an axial traction of 0.2 mm/s. LHB displacement during testing was measured by 3-dimensional photogrammetry. RESULTS: All techniques had a mean displacement of less than 3 mm after cyclic loading. The highest UFL was measured with the Bio-Tenodesis screw (mean, 218.3 N; range, 134.0 to 313.0 N; SD, 59.7 N) and the lowest with the BioSwiveLock (mean, 111.2 N; range, 60.0 to 156.8 N; SD, 32.3 N). The Healix had the second highest UFL (mean, 187.1 N; range, 144.7 to 245.0 N; SD, 35.5 N), followed by the Biceptor (mean, 173.9 N; range, 147.0 to 209.3 N; SD, 27.2 N). There was no significant difference between the Healix, Bio-Tenodesis screw, and Biceptor (P > .05), but the Healix and Bio-Tenodesis screw had a significantly higher UFL than the BioSwiveLock (P < .01). The failure mode was either suture cutout or failure at the anchor-suture-bone interface or of the tendon itself and was generally dependent on technique. CONCLUSIONS: All techniques resisted cyclic testing without a higher grade of displacement, and all devices except the BioSwiveLock had a satisfactory UFL whereas different failure mechanisms were present. The modified lasso-loop stitch provides sufficient tendon fixation and is equivalent to interference screws. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The lasso-loop suture anchor technique is an appropriate alternative for suprapectoral LHB tenodesis compared with tenodesis screw techniques.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是生物力学比较四种在关节镜下可进行的肱二头肌腱长(LHB)的上rap上腱固定术中广泛使用的4种技术的循环和最终破坏载荷(UFL)。方法:我们使用了28例新鲜冷冻的人体尸体标本(平均年龄65岁[范围:43至78岁; SD,6.7岁];男性标本占43%)来研究4种不同的LHB肌腱固定术。所有技术均以开放的方式进行,定位在二头肌沟的入口。两种缝合锚固技术(Healix [DePuy Mitek,美国马萨诸塞州雷纳姆],5.5毫米,带改良套索环针脚; BioSwiveLock [Arthrex,那不勒斯,佛罗里达州],5.5毫米,带互锁克拉科夫针)和两种技术,使用肌腱固定螺钉(Bio -研究了Tenodesis螺钉[Arthrex],8 x 23 mm; Biceptor [Smith&Nephew,安多弗,马萨诸塞州],8 x 25 mm)。在10-N的预紧力下,施加了100个周期,1-Hz频率和50-N的最大负载的轴向循环负载。 UFL的轴向牵引力为0.2 mm / s。通过3维摄影测量法测量测试期间的LHB位移。结果:所有技术在循环加载后的平均位移均小于3 mm。使用Bio-Tenodesis螺丝测量的UFL最高(平均值为218.3 N;范围为134.0至313.0 N; SD为59.7 N),而使用BioSwiveLock测量的最低UFL(平均值为111.2 N;范围60.0至156.8 N; SD, 32.3 N)。 Healix具有第二高的UFL(平均值为187.1 N;范围为144.7至245.0 N; SD为35.5 N),其次是Biceptor(平均值为173.9 N;范围为147.0至209.3 N; SD为27.2 N)。 Healix,Bio-Tenodesis螺钉和Biceptor之间没有显着差异(P> .05),但是Healix和Bio-Tenodesis螺钉的UFL明显高于BioSwiveLock(P <.01)。失败模式是缝合切口或在锚-缝合线-骨界面或肌腱本身的失败,并且通常取决于技术。结论:所有技术均能抵抗循环测试,而无更高等级的位移,并且除BioSwiveLock之外的所有设备均具有令人满意的UFL,但存在不同的失效机制。改进的套索环线迹可提供足够的肌腱固定,相当于干涉螺钉。临床相关性:与肌腱固定螺钉技术相比,套索环缝合锚固技术是sup上型LHB肌腱固定术的合适替代方法。

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