首页> 外文期刊>Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy: official journal of the ESSKA >Biomechanical comparison of three techniques for fixation of tibial avulsion fractures of the anterior cruciate ligament
【24h】

Biomechanical comparison of three techniques for fixation of tibial avulsion fractures of the anterior cruciate ligament

机译:三种技术固定前交叉韧带胫骨撕脱性骨折的生物力学比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: To evaluate the initial stability of a suture anchor fixation and to compare this with a screw fixation and pull-out suture fixation for anterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fracture. Methods: The initial fixation strength of 3 different fixation techniques, antegrade cannulated screw fixation, pull-out suture fixation with Ethibond and bioabsorbable knotless suture anchor fixation, was evaluated. Using 14 fresh cadavers (28 knees), the strength to failure, initial displacement and mode of failure were measured. Results: The strength to failure of the suture anchor fixation was not significantly different from that of the screw fixation and was higher than that of the pull-out suture fixation. The initial displacement of the suture anchor fixation was lower than that of the screw fixation and the pull-out suture fixation. The majority of the suture anchor fixations and the screw fixations were failed by pull-out from the bone. Eight of the 56 suture anchor fixations failed by pull-out of the suture from the ligament proper. And, one of the 7 screw fixations failed due to fracture of the avulsed bony fragment. All of the pull-out suture fixations failed by suture material rupture. Conclusions: These biomechanical results suggest that the initial fixation strength of suture anchor fixation was not less than that of screw fixation or pull-out suture fixation. And, the initial displacement of suture anchor fixation was lower than that of screw fixation or pull-out suture fixation. The suture anchor fixation appears to be a good alternative fixation technique for repair of anterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fracture.
机译:目的:评估缝线锚固件固定的初始稳定性,并将其与前交叉韧带胫骨撕脱性骨折的螺钉固定和拔出缝线固定进行比较。方法:评估了三种不同的固定技术的初始固定强度,即顺行空心螺钉固定,Ethibond拔出缝合线固定和生物可吸收无结缝合锚钉固定。使用14个新鲜的尸体(28个膝盖),测量了破坏强度,初始位移和破坏模式。结果:缝合锚钉固定的破坏强度与螺钉固定没有明显差异,但高于拔出缝合线固定。缝线锚固件的初始位移低于螺钉固定和拔出缝线支架的位移。大多数缝合锚钉固定和螺钉固定由于从骨头中拔出而失败。 56个缝合锚钉固定器中有8个因从适当的韧带上拉出缝合线而失败。并且,由于撕脱的骨碎片断裂,这7个螺钉固定之一失败了。所有拔出的缝合线固定均因缝合线材料破裂而失败。结论:这些生物力学结果表明,缝合锚钉固定的初始固定强度不小于螺钉固定或拔出缝合线固定的强度。并且,缝合锚钉固定的初始位移低于螺钉固定或拔出缝合线固定的位移。缝线锚固术似乎是修复前交叉韧带胫骨撕脱性骨折的一种很好的替代固定技术。

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