Suppr超能文献

解剖缝线锚与 Broström 技术治疗前距腓韧带损伤的比较:生物力学比较。

Anatomic suture anchor versus the Broström technique for anterior talofibular ligament repair: a biomechanical comparison.

机构信息

Department of BioMedical Engineering, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.

出版信息

Am J Sports Med. 2012 Nov;40(11):2590-6. doi: 10.1177/0363546512458420. Epub 2012 Sep 7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite the popularity of the Broström procedure for secondary repair of chronic lateral ankle instability, there have been no biomechanical studies reporting on the strength of this secondary repair method, whether using suture fixation or suture anchors.

HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of our study was to perform a biomechanical comparison of the ultimate load to failure and stiffness of the traditional Broström technique using only a suture repair compared with a suture anchor repair of the anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) at time zero. We believed that fixation strength of the suture anchor repair would be closer to the strength of the native ligament and allow more aggressive rehabilitation.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Twenty-four fresh-frozen cadaveric ankles were randomly divided into 4 groups of 6 specimens. One group was an intact control group, and the other groups consisted of the traditional Broström and 2 suture anchor modifications (suture anchors in talus or fibula) of the Broström procedure. The specimens were loaded to failure to determine the strength and stiffness of each construct.

RESULTS

In load-to-failure testing, ultimate failure loads of the Broström (68.2 ± 27.8 N; P = .013), suture anchor fibula (79.2 ± 34.3 N; P = .037), and suture anchor talus (75.3 ± 45.6 N; P = .027) repairs were significantly lower than that of the intact (160.9 ± 72.2 N) ATFL group. Stiffness of the Broström (6.0 ± 2.5 N/mm; P = .02), suture anchor fibula (6.8 N/mm ± 2.7; P = .05), and suture anchor talus (6.6 N/mm ± 4.0; P = .04) repairs were significantly lower than that of the intact (12.4 N/mm ± 4.1 N/mm) ATFL group. The 3 repair groups were not significantly different from each other, but all 3 were substantially lower in strength and stiffness when compared to the intact ATFL.

CONCLUSION

The use of suture anchors to repair the ATFL produces a repair that can withstand loads to failure similar to the suture-only Broström repair. However, all 3 repair groups were much weaker than the intact, uninjured ATFL.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Biomechanically, the results show that both suture anchor and direct suture repair of the ATFL provide similar strength and stiffness. Unfortunately, these methods provide less than half the strength and stiffness of the native ATFL at time zero. As a result, regardless of the repair method, it is necessary to sufficiently protect the repair to avoid premature failure.

摘要

背景

尽管 Broström 术式被广泛用于慢性外侧踝关节不稳定的二次修复,但目前尚无生物力学研究报告该二次修复方法(缝线固定或缝线锚定)的强度。

假设

我们的研究目的是在零时刻,对仅使用缝线修复的传统 Broström 技术与前距腓韧带(ATFL)的缝线锚定修复进行最终失效载荷和刚度的生物力学比较。我们认为缝线锚定修复的固定强度将更接近固有韧带的强度,并允许更积极的康复。

研究设计

对照实验室研究。

方法

将 24 个新鲜冷冻的尸体踝关节随机分为 4 组,每组 6 个标本。一组为完整对照组,其余 3 组为传统 Broström 术式和 2 种缝线锚定改良术式(距骨或腓骨中的缝线锚定)。对标本进行失效载荷测试,以确定每种结构的强度和刚度。

结果

在失效载荷测试中,Broström(68.2 ± 27.8 N;P =.013)、缝线锚定腓骨(79.2 ± 34.3 N;P =.037)和缝线锚定距骨(75.3 ± 45.6 N;P =.027)修复的最终失效载荷明显低于完整 ATFL 组(160.9 ± 72.2 N)。Broström(6.0 ± 2.5 N/mm;P =.02)、缝线锚定腓骨(6.8 N/mm ± 2.7;P =.05)和缝线锚定距骨(6.6 N/mm ± 4.0;P =.04)修复的刚度明显低于完整 ATFL 组(12.4 N/mm ± 4.1 N/mm)。3 种修复组彼此之间没有显著差异,但与完整的 ATFL 相比,所有 3 种修复组的强度和刚度都明显降低。

结论

使用缝线锚定修复 ATFL 可产生可承受失效载荷的修复,与仅缝线的 Broström 修复相似。然而,所有 3 种修复组的强度都远低于完整、未受伤的 ATFL。

临床相关性

从生物力学的角度来看,结果表明,ATFL 的缝线锚定和直接缝线修复都提供了相似的强度和刚度。不幸的是,这些方法在零时刻提供的强度和刚度仅为固有 ATFL 的一半。因此,无论采用哪种修复方法,都需要充分保护修复,以避免过早失效。

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