Suppr超能文献

三种前交叉韧带胫骨止点撕脱骨折固定技术的生物力学比较。

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

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012 Aug;20(8):1470-8. doi: 10.1007/s00167-011-1694-7. Epub 2011 Oct 11.

Abstract

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.

摘要

目的

评估缝线锚定固定的初始稳定性,并将其与螺钉固定和缝线抽出固定前交叉韧带胫骨撕脱骨折进行比较。

方法

评估了 3 种不同固定技术(顺行套管螺钉固定、Ethibond 缝线抽出固定和可吸收无结缝线锚定固定)的初始固定强度。使用 14 个新鲜尸体(28 个膝关节)测量失效强度、初始位移和失效模式。

结果

缝线锚定固定的失效强度与螺钉固定无显著差异,高于缝线抽出固定。缝线锚定固定的初始位移低于螺钉固定和缝线抽出固定。大多数缝线锚定固定和螺钉固定都是从骨中抽出而失效。56 个缝线锚定固定中有 8 个是由于韧带本身的缝线抽出而失效。而 7 个螺钉固定中有 1 个是由于撕脱骨碎片骨折而失效。所有缝线抽出固定都是由于缝线材料断裂而失效。

结论

这些生物力学结果表明,缝线锚定固定的初始固定强度不低于螺钉固定或缝线抽出固定。而且,缝线锚定固定的初始位移低于螺钉固定或缝线抽出固定。缝线锚定固定似乎是修复前交叉韧带胫骨撕脱骨折的一种良好的替代固定技术。

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