Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Am J Sports Med. 2018 Jul;46(8):1952-1958. doi: 10.1177/0363546518771359. Epub 2018 May 15.
Restoring footprint anatomy, minimizing gap formation, and maximizing the strength of distal triceps tendon repairs are essential factors for a successful healing process and return to sport.
The novel V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique with unicortical button fixation closely restores footprint anatomy, provides minimal gap formation and high ultimate failure load, and minimizes iatrogenic fracture risk in acute/subacute distal triceps tendon tears.
Controlled laboratory study.
Twenty-four cadaveric elbows (mean ± SD age, 66 ± 5 years) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 repair groups: the transosseous cruciate repair technique (gold standard), the knotless suture-bridge repair technique, and the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique. Anatomic measurements of the central triceps tendon footprint were obtained in all specimens with a 3-dimensional digitizer before and after the repair. Cyclic loading was performed for a total of 1500 cycles at a rate of 0.25 Hz, pulling in the direction of the triceps. Displacements were measured on the medial and lateral tendon sites with 2 differential variable reluctance transducers. Load to failure and construct failure mode were recorded.
The mean triceps bony insertion area was 399.05 ± 81.23 mm. The transosseous cruciate repair technique restored 36.6% ± 16.8% of the native tendon insertion area, which was significantly different when compared with the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (85.2% ± 14.8%, P = .001) and the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (88.9% ± 14.8%, P = .002). Mean displacement showed no significant difference between the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (medial side, 0.75 ± 0.56 mm; lateral side, 0.99 ± 0.59 mm) and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (1.61 ± 0.97 mm and 1.29 ± 0.8 mm) but significance between the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the transosseous cruciate repair technique (4.91 ± 1.12 mm and 5.78 ± 0.9 mm, P < .001). Mean peak failure load of the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (732.1 ± 156.0 N) was significantly higher than that of the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (505.4 ± 173.9 N, P = .011) and the transosseous cruciate repair technique (281.1 ± 74.8 N, P < .001). Mechanism of failure differed among the 3 repairs, with the only olecranon fracture occurring in the knotless suture-bridge repair technique at the level of the lateral row suture anchors.
At time zero, the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique both provided anatomic footprint coverage. Ultimate load to failure was highest for the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique, while gap formation was different only in comparison with the transosseous cruciate repair technique.
The V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique provides an alternative procedure to other established repairs for acute/subacute distal triceps tendon ruptures. The reduced repair site motion of the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique at the time of surgery may allow a more aggressive rehabilitation program in the early postoperative period.
恢复跟腱解剖结构、减少间隙形成、最大限度地提高远端三头肌腱修复的强度是手术成功愈合和重返运动的关键因素。
新型 V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术采用单皮质纽扣固定,可密切恢复跟腱解剖结构,最小化间隙形成,最大限度地提高最终失效负荷,并最大限度地降低急性/亚急性远端三头肌腱撕裂的医源性骨折风险。
对照实验室研究。
24 个尸体肘部(平均年龄±标准差,66±5 岁)被随机分配到 3 种修复组之一:经骨十字交叉修复技术(金标准)、无结缝线桥修复技术和 V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术。在修复前后,使用三维数字化仪对所有标本的中央三头肌腱附着点进行解剖测量。在向三头肌方向拉动的情况下,以 0.25 Hz 的速率进行总共 1500 次循环的循环加载。在内侧和外侧肌腱部位使用 2 个差动变压式传感器测量位移。记录失效负荷和结构失效模式。
三头肌腱骨插入面积平均为 399.05±81.23mm。经骨十字交叉修复技术恢复了 36.6%±16.8%的原生肌腱插入面积,与无结缝线桥修复技术(85.2%±14.8%,P=.001)和 V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术(88.9%±14.8%,P=.002)相比差异显著。V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术(内侧侧,0.75±0.56mm;外侧侧,0.99±0.59mm)和无结缝线桥修复技术(1.61±0.97mm 和 1.29±0.8mm)之间的平均位移无显著差异,但 V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术与经骨十字交叉修复技术之间有显著差异(4.91±1.12mm 和 5.78±0.9mm,P<.001)。V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术的平均峰值失效负荷(732.1±156.0N)显著高于无结缝线桥修复技术(505.4±173.9N,P=.011)和经骨十字交叉修复技术(281.1±74.8N,P<.001)。3 种修复方式的失效机制不同,仅在无结缝线桥修复技术中,外侧缝线锚钉水平发生了唯一的鹰嘴骨折。
在零时间点,V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术和无结缝线桥修复技术都提供了跟腱解剖覆盖。V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术的最终失效负荷最高,而间隙形成仅与经骨十字交叉修复技术不同。
V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术为急性/亚急性远端三头肌腱断裂提供了另一种替代方法。V 形远端三头肌腱修复技术和无结缝线桥修复技术在手术时减少了修复部位的运动,这可能允许在术后早期进行更积极的康复计划。