Çelikkent Sitesi, A-2 No: 6 Çayyolu, Ankara, Turkey.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010 Dec;18(12):1779-84. doi: 10.1007/s00167-010-1180-7. Epub 2010 Jun 12.
Different surgical techniques exist for biceps tenodesis. The most secure fixation technique is with interference screws. The purpose of the study was to compare the biomechanical performance of three different interference screw biceps tenodesis fixation methods, which involve different tunnel preparation methods. Using a sheep shoulder model and metal interference screws, a bone wedge technique was compared to serial tunnel dilation and a control group. After a preload, all repairs were cyclically loaded (20-60 N) for 100 cycles followed by destructive testing. Biceps tenodesis using an interference screw--bone wedge technique showed statistically lower cyclic displacement (8.1 ± 6.4 mm) than serial dilatation with an interference screw (21.3 ± 8.4 mm) or interference screw fixation alone (18.3 ± 8.3 mm) (P = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences in ultimate failure strength for any of the interference screw biceps tenodesis techniques tested. The tunnel preparation method chosen for interference screw fixed biceps tenodesis can have a positive effect on tenodesis performance. Using the bone wedge technique may allow a more rapid rehabilitation program applicable for the traumatic biceps tendon rupture seen in young, athletic patients with high demands.
不同的手术技术可用于肱二头肌肌腱固定术。最安全的固定技术是使用干扰螺钉。本研究的目的是比较三种不同的干扰螺钉肱二头肌肌腱固定术固定方法的生物力学性能，这些方法涉及不同的隧道制备方法。使用羊肩模型和金属干扰螺钉，将骨楔技术与连续隧道扩张法和对照组进行了比较。在预加载后，所有修复均进行循环加载（20-60N）100 次，然后进行破坏性测试。与连续扩张（21.3±8.4mm）或单独使用干扰螺钉固定（18.3±8.3mm）相比，使用干扰螺钉-骨楔技术的肱二头肌肌腱固定术的循环位移（8.1±6.4mm）统计学上更低（P=0.02）。测试的任何一种干扰螺钉肱二头肌肌腱固定术技术的最终失效强度均无统计学差异。选择用于干扰螺钉固定肱二头肌肌腱固定术的隧道制备方法可能对固定效果有积极影响。使用骨楔技术可能允许更快速的康复计划适用于年轻、运动活跃的患者，这些患者对高要求的创伤性肱二头肌肌腱断裂有较高的需求。
