Hepp Pierre, Osterhoff Georg, Engel Thomas, Marquass Bastian, Klink Thomas, Josten Christoph
Department of Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Am J Sports Med. 2009 Jul;37(7):1363-9. doi: 10.1177/0363546509332431. Epub 2009 Mar 23.
The layered configuration of the rotator cuff tendon is not taken into account in classic rotator cuff tendon repair techniques.
The mechanical properties of (1) the classic double-row technique, (2) a double-layer double-row (DLDR) technique in simple suture configuration, and (3) a DLDR technique in mattress suture configuration are significantly different.
Controlled laboratory study.
Twenty-four sheep shoulders were assigned to 3 repair groups of full-thickness infraspinatus tears: group 1, traditional double-row repair; group 2, DLDR anchor repair with simple suture configuration; and group 3, DLDR knotless repair with mattress suture configuration. After ultrasound evaluation of the repair, each specimen was cyclically loaded with 10 to 100 N for 50 cycles. Each specimen was then loaded to failure at a rate of 1 mm/s.
There were no statistically significant differences among the 3 testing groups for the mean footprint area. The cyclic loading test revealed no significant difference among the 3 groups with regard to elongation. For the load-to-failure test, groups 2 and 3 showed no differences in ultimate tensile load when compared with group 1. However, when compared to group 2, group 3 was found to have significantly higher values regarding ultimate load, ultimate elongation, and energy absorbed.
The DLDR fixation techniques may provide strength of initial repair comparable with that of commonly used double-row techniques. When compared with the knotless technique with mattress sutures, simple suture configuration of DLDR repair may be too weak. Knotless DLDR rotator cuff repair may (1) restore the footprint by the use of double-row principles and (2) enable restoration of the shape and profile.
Double-layer double-row fixation in mattress suture configuration has initial fixation strength comparable with that of the classic double-row fixation and so may potentially improve functional results of rotator cuff repair.
经典的肩袖肌腱修复技术未考虑肩袖肌腱的分层结构。
(1)经典双排技术、(2)简单缝合构型的双层双排(DLDR)技术和(3)褥式缝合构型的DLDR技术的力学性能存在显著差异。
对照实验室研究。
将24只羊的肩部分配到3个全层冈下肌撕裂修复组:第1组,传统双排修复;第2组,简单缝合构型的DLDR锚钉修复;第3组,褥式缝合构型的DLDR无结修复。在对修复进行超声评估后,每个标本以10至100 N的力循环加载50次。然后每个标本以1 mm/s的速率加载至破坏。
3个测试组的平均足迹面积无统计学显著差异。循环加载试验显示3组在伸长方面无显著差异。对于破坏载荷试验,与第1组相比,第2组和第3组的极限拉伸载荷无差异。然而,与第2组相比,第3组在极限载荷、极限伸长和吸收能量方面的值显著更高。
DLDR固定技术可能提供与常用双排技术相当的初始修复强度。与褥式缝合无结技术相比,DLDR修复的简单缝合构型可能太弱。无结DLDR肩袖修复可能(1)通过使用双排原则恢复足迹,(2)实现形状和轮廓的恢复。
褥式缝合构型的双层双排固定具有与经典双排固定相当的初始固定强度,因此可能潜在地改善肩袖修复的功能结果。