Ballesteros-Betancourt Jose, Rosales Roberto S, García-Tarriño Raquel, Rios Jose, Combalia-Aleu Andrés, Llusá-Pérez Manuel
Department of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital Ernest Lluch, Calatayud, Spain.
Macro- and Micro-Dissection and Surgical Anatomy Laboratory, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2019 Oct;44(8):816-824. doi: 10.1177/1753193419859548. Epub 2019 Jul 8.
We compared the biomechanical properties of the Teo intraosseous suture technique with the modified Bunnell pullout technique in a cadaver model after a tendon to bone repair. Thirty-six fresh-frozen cadaveric fingers were assigned randomly to three groups (Teo, Bunnell and control groups). They were loaded cyclically from 2 to 15 N at 25 mm/min, for 500 cycles. Gap formation at the repair site was assessed every 100 cycles and then specimens were tested to failure. The Teo group had an approximately 30% smaller gap every 100 cycles and needed 30% more energy to obtain a 2 mm gap than the modified Bunnell group. Displacement after 500 cyclic loads was significantly lower in the Teo group than in the Bunnell group. For the failure of the Teo suture, it was necessary to apply 31% more load than the Bunnell technique.
在肌腱至骨修复后的尸体模型中,我们比较了Teo骨内缝合技术与改良Bunnell拔出技术的生物力学特性。将36个新鲜冷冻的尸体手指随机分为三组(Teo组、Bunnell组和对照组)。以25毫米/分钟的速度从2牛至15牛进行循环加载,共500个循环。每100个循环评估修复部位的间隙形成情况,然后对标本进行破坏测试。与改良Bunnell组相比,Teo组每100个循环的间隙小约30%,形成2毫米间隙所需的能量多30%。Teo组在500次循环加载后的位移明显低于Bunnell组。对于Teo缝合的破坏,需要比Bunnell技术多施加31%的负荷。