Suppr超能文献

三种当前踝关节下胫腓联合修复技术的生物力学比较

Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Current Ankle Syndesmosis Repair Techniques.

作者信息

Clanton Thomas O, Whitlow Scott R, Williams Brady T, Liechti Daniel J, Backus Jonathon D, Dornan Grant J, Saroki Adriana J, Turnbull Travis Lee, LaPrade Robert F

机构信息

1 Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.

2 The Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA.

出版信息

Foot Ankle Int. 2017 Feb;38(2):200-207. doi: 10.1177/1071100716666278. Epub 2016 Oct 1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Significant debate exists regarding optimal repair for unstable syndesmosis injuries. Techniques range from screw fixation, suture-button fixation, or a combination of the two. In this study, 3 common repairs were compared using a simulated weightbearing protocol with internal and external rotation of the foot.

METHODS

Twenty-four lower leg specimens with mean age 54 years (range, 38-68 years) were used for testing. Following creation of a complete syndesmotic injury (AITFL, ITFL, PITFL, interosseous membrane), specimens were repaired using 1 of 3 randomly assigned techniques: (1) one 3.5-mm syndesmotic screw, (2) 1 suture-button construct, and (3) 2 divergent suture-button constructs. Repairs were cycled for 500 cycles between 7.5 Nm of internal/external rotation torque under a constant 750 N axial compressive load in a neutral dorsiflexion position. At 0, 10, 100, and 500 cycles, torsional cyclic loading was interrupted to assess torsional resistance to rotation within a physiologic range of motion (15 degrees external rotation to 10 degrees internal rotation). Torque (Nm), rotational position (degrees), and 3-dimensional data were collected throughout the testing to characterize relative spatial relationships of the tibiofibular articulation.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between repair techniques in resistance to internal and external rotation with respect to the intact syndesmosis. Three-dimensional analysis revealed significant differences between repair techniques for sagittal fibular translation with external rotation of the foot. Screw fixation had the smallest magnitude of posterior sagittal translation (2.5 mm), and a single suture-button construct demonstrated the largest magnitude of posterior sagittal translation (4.6 mm). Screw fixation also allowed for significantly less anterior sagittal translation with internal rotation of the foot (0.1 mm) when compared to both 1 (2.7 mm) and 2 (2.9 mm) suture-button constructs.

CONCLUSION

All repairs provided comparable rotational stability to the syndesmosis; however, no repair technique completely restored rotational stability and tibiofibular anatomic relationships of the preinjury state.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Constructs were comparable across most conditions; however, when repairing injuries with a suture-button construct, a single suture-button construct may not provide sufficient resistance to sagittal translation of the fibula.

摘要

背景

关于不稳定下胫腓联合损伤的最佳修复方法存在重大争议。技术范围包括螺钉固定、缝线纽扣固定或两者结合。在本研究中,使用模拟负重方案,使足部进行内旋和外旋,比较了3种常见的修复方法。

方法

使用24个平均年龄54岁(范围38 - 68岁)的小腿标本进行测试。在造成完全的下胫腓联合损伤(前下胫腓韧带、后下胫腓韧带、骨间膜)后,标本采用3种随机分配技术中的1种进行修复:(1)一枚3.5毫米下胫腓联合螺钉,(2)1个缝线纽扣结构,(3)2个发散的缝线纽扣结构。在中立背屈位,在750 N恒定轴向压缩载荷下,修复结构在7.5 Nm的内/外旋转扭矩之间循环500次。在0、10、100和500次循环时,中断扭转循环加载,以评估在生理运动范围内(15度外旋至10度内旋)的抗扭转旋转能力。在整个测试过程中收集扭矩(Nm)、旋转位置(度)和三维数据,以表征胫腓关节的相对空间关系。

结果

就完整的下胫腓联合而言,修复技术在抗内旋和外旋方面没有显著差异。三维分析显示,在足部外旋时,修复技术在腓骨矢状面平移方面存在显著差异。螺钉固定的后矢状面平移幅度最小(2.5毫米),单个缝线纽扣结构的后矢状面平移幅度最大(4.6毫米)。与1个(2.7毫米)和2个(2.9毫米)缝线纽扣结构相比,螺钉固定在足部内旋时的前矢状面平移也明显更小(0.1毫米)。

结论

所有修复方法都为下胫腓联合提供了相当的旋转稳定性;然而,没有一种修复技术能完全恢复损伤前状态的旋转稳定性和胫腓解剖关系。

临床意义

在大多数情况下,修复结构具有可比性;然而,在用缝线纽扣结构修复损伤时,单个缝线纽扣结构可能无法为腓骨的矢状面平移提供足够的抵抗力。

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