Suppr超能文献

巨大肩袖撕裂的初始固定强度:单排缝合锚钉与经骨隧道结构的体外比较

Initial fixation strength of massive rotator cuff tears: in vitro comparison of single-row suture anchor and transosseous tunnel constructs.

作者信息

Tashjian Robert Z, Levanthal Evan, Spenciner David B, Green Andrew, Fleming Braden C

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Bioengineering Laboratory, Brown Medical School/Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.

出版信息

Arthroscopy. 2007 Jul;23(7):710-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2007.01.027.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the in vitro repair integrity of massive rotator cuff tears fixed with transosseous tunnel and single-lateral row suture anchor techniques.

METHODS

A 5 x 2-cm crescent-shaped rotator cuff tear was created in 6 matched pairs of cadaveric shoulders. Paired shoulders were repaired with 3 transosseous tunnels and 6 Mason-Allen sutures or with 3 screw-in suture anchors and 6 simple sutures. The repairs were cyclically loaded at physiologic forces along the respective directions of pull when the arm was in 90 degrees of scapular plane elevation. Gap formation and repair displacements were monitored with digital video imaging at 3 sites for each repair.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the maximal gapping of the repair constructs. After 4,000 cycles, the mean maximal gapping at any position along the repair was 6.2 +/- 2.99 mm in the transosseous tunnel construct and 4.9 +/- 1.27 mm in the suture anchor repair construct (P = .40). Gapping was significantly less in the anterior region when compared with the posterior region of the repair (P = .015).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in cyclic loading of transosseous and single-row suture anchor repair techniques. Significantly greater gap formation occurs at the posterior aspect of repairs of massive rotator cuff tears in this in vitro model.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Initial fixation strength of single-row suture anchor repairs is equivalent to that of transosseous repairs. Further research is required to determine the unknown clinical significance of increased posterior repair gap formation.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较采用经骨隧道和单排缝线锚钉技术修复巨大肩袖撕裂的体外修复完整性。

方法

在6对匹配的尸体肩部制造一个5×2厘米的新月形肩袖撕裂。配对的肩部分别采用3个经骨隧道和6根梅森-艾伦缝线或3个拧入式缝线锚钉和6根简单缝线进行修复。当手臂处于肩胛平面抬高90度时,沿各自的牵拉方向以生理力对修复部位进行循环加载。通过数字视频成像监测每个修复部位3个位置的间隙形成和修复移位情况。

结果

修复结构最大间隙之间无显著差异。4000次循环后,经骨隧道结构沿修复部位任何位置的平均最大间隙为6.2±2.99毫米,缝线锚钉修复结构为4.9±1.27毫米(P = 0.40)。与修复部位的后部相比,前部的间隙明显更小(P = 0.015)。

结论

经骨修复和单排缝线锚钉修复技术在循环加载方面无差异。在这个体外模型中,巨大肩袖撕裂修复的后部间隙形成明显更大。

临床意义

单排缝线锚钉修复的初始固定强度与经骨修复相当。需要进一步研究以确定后部修复间隙增加的未知临床意义。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验