采用改良双切口入路修复肱二头肌远端肌腱后进行积极康复训练是否安全？一项生物力学研究。
Is it safe to perform aggressive rehabilitation after distal biceps tendon repair using the modified 2-incision approach? A biomechanical study.
作者信息
Bisson Leslie J, de Perio Jennifer Gurske, Weber Alexander E, Ehrensberger Mark T, Buyea Cathy
机构信息
Department of Orthopaedics, University of Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, USA.
出版信息
Am J Sports Med. 2007 Dec;35(12):2045-50. doi: 10.1177/0363546507305679. Epub 2007 Aug 16.
BACKGROUND
Despite improved methods of fixation, there is still a delay in early active motion after distal biceps repair.
HYPOTHESIS
Distal biceps repairs using the modified 2-incision technique can be treated with early motion, and there is no difference in the cyclic performance of Ethibond and Fiberwire when used for the repair.
STUDY DESIGN
Controlled laboratory study.
METHODS
Nine matched pairs of cadaveric elbows had release of the distal biceps followed by repair with either No. 5 Ethibond or Fiberwire through a bone tunnel. The repairs were cyclically loaded for 3000 cycles (1000 cycles from 10-50 N, 1000 cycles from 10-75 N, 1000 cycles from 10-100 N) followed by single-load displacement to failure in surviving specimens.
RESULTS
There was no difference in the displacement or stiffness between surviving repairs at any point measured. Ethibond repairs survived significantly more cycles than did Fiberwire repairs, particularly at higher loads.
CONCLUSION
Distal biceps repair using the 2-incision technique with Ethibond should allow early active motion, but early active motion may not be possible with Fiberwire.
背景
尽管固定方法有所改进，但肱二头肌远端修复术后早期主动活动仍有延迟。
假设
采用改良双切口技术修复肱二头肌远端可进行早期活动，且Ethibond和Fiberwire用于修复时的循环性能无差异。
研究设计
对照实验室研究。
方法
9对匹配的尸体肘部标本，松解肱二头肌远端，然后通过骨隧道用5号Ethibond或Fiberwire进行修复。修复后进行3000次循环加载（1000次循环，载荷从10至50牛；1000次循环，载荷从10至75牛；1000次循环，载荷从10至100牛），然后对存活标本进行单次加载直至破坏。
结果
在任何测量点，存活修复的位移或刚度均无差异。Ethibond修复比Fiberwire修复能承受更多的循环次数，尤其是在较高载荷下。
结论
采用2切口技术并用Ethibond修复肱二头肌远端应允许早期主动活动，但使用Fiberwire可能无法进行早期主动活动。
Zotero 插件