Suppr超能文献

生物复合材料锚固定单排、三负载肩袖修复与双排、缝线带肩袖修复的腱骨界面运动和循环加载的生物力学比较。

A biomechanical comparison of tendon-bone interface motion and cyclic loading between single-row, triple-loaded cuff repairs and double-row, suture-tape cuff repairs using biocomposite anchors.

机构信息

Plano Orthopedic Sports Medicine and Spine Center, Plano, Texas, U.S.A.

出版信息

Arthroscopy. 2012 Sep;28(9):1197-205. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.02.015. Epub 2012 May 15.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare tendon-bone interface motion and cyclic loading in a single-row, triple-loaded anchor repair with a suture-tape, rip-stop, double-row rotator cuff repair.

METHODS

Using 18 human shoulders from 9 matched cadaveric pairs, we created 2 groups of rotator cuff repairs. Group 1 was a double-row, rip-stop, suture-tape construct. Group 2 was a single-row, triple-loaded construct. Before mechanical testing, the supraspinatus footprint was measured with calipers. A superiorly positioned digital camera optically measured the tendon footprint motion during 60° of humeral internal and external rotation. Specimens were secured at a fixed angle not exceeding 45° in reference to the load. After preloading, each sample was cycled between 10 N and 100 N for 200 cycles at 1 Hz, followed by destructive testing at 33 mm/s. A digital camera with tracking software measured the repair displacement at 100 and 200 cycles. Ultimate load and failure mode for each sample were recorded.

RESULTS

The exposed anterior footprint border (6.5% ± 6%) and posterior footprint border (0.9% ± 1.7%) in group 1 were statistically less than the exposed anterior footprint border (30.3% ± 17%) and posterior footprint border (29.8% ± 14%) in group 2 (P = .003 and P < .001, respectively). The maximal internal rotation and external rotation tendon footprint displacements in group 1 (1.6 mm and 1.4 mm, respectively) were less than those in group 2 (both 3.6 mm) (P = .007 and P = .004, respectively). Mean displacement after 100 cycles for group 1 and group 2 was 2.0 mm and 3.2 mm, respectively, and at 200 cycles, mean displacement was 2.5 mm and 4.2 mm, respectively (P = .02). The mean ultimate failure load in group 1 (586 N) was greater than that in group 2 (393 N) (P = .02). The suture-tendon interface was the site of most construct failures.

CONCLUSIONS

The suture-tape, rip-stop, double-row rotator cuff repair had greater footprint coverage, less rotational footprint displacement, and a greater mean ultimate failure load than the triple-loaded, single-row repair on mechanical testing. No double-row or single-row constructs showed 5 mm of displacement after the first 100 cycles. The most common failure mode for both constructs was suture tearing through the tendon.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Differences in cuff fixation influence rotational tendon movement and may influence postoperative healing. Stronger repair constructs still fail at the suture-tendon interface.

摘要

目的

比较单排三负载锚修复与缝线带、防撕裂双排肩袖修复的腱骨界面运动和循环加载。

方法

使用 9 对匹配的尸体的 18 个人类肩部,我们创建了两组肩袖修复。第 1 组是双排防撕裂缝线带构建。第 2 组是单排三负载构建。在进行力学测试之前,使用卡尺测量肩袖止点的大小。一个位于上方的数码相机通过光学测量在肱骨内、外旋 60°时的肌腱止点运动。标本以不超过 45°的固定角度固定在负荷上。预加载后,每个样本在 1 Hz 下以 10 N 和 100 N 之间循环 200 次,然后以 33 mm/s 的速度进行破坏性测试。一个带有跟踪软件的数码相机在 100 次和 200 次循环时测量修复体的位移。记录每个样本的极限载荷和失效模式。

结果

第 1 组暴露的前肩袖止点边界(6.5%±6%)和后肩袖止点边界(0.9%±1.7%)明显小于第 2 组暴露的前肩袖止点边界(30.3%±17%)和后肩袖止点边界(29.8%±14%)(P=0.003 和 P<0.001)。第 1 组的最大内旋和外旋肌腱止点位移(分别为 1.6mm 和 1.4mm)小于第 2 组(均为 3.6mm)(P=0.007 和 P=0.004)。第 1 组和第 2 组在 100 次循环后的平均位移分别为 2.0mm 和 3.2mm,在 200 次循环后的平均位移分别为 2.5mm 和 4.2mm(P=0.02)。第 1 组的平均极限失效载荷(586N)大于第 2 组(393N)(P=0.02)。缝线带、防撕裂双排肩袖修复的缝线-肌腱界面的大部分结构失效。

结论

在机械测试中,缝线带、防撕裂双排肩袖修复的肩袖比三负载单排修复具有更大的止点覆盖范围、更小的旋转止点位移和更大的平均极限失效载荷。两种修复结构在最初的 100 次循环后都没有超过 5mm 的位移。两种结构的最常见失效模式都是缝线在肌腱上撕裂。

临床意义

肩袖固定方式的差异会影响旋转肌腱的运动,可能会影响术后愈合。更强的修复结构仍在缝线-肌腱界面失效。

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