Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Medical School Hannover, DIAKOVERE Annastift, Anna-von-Borries-Straße 1-7, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, DIAKOVERE Friederikenstift, Humboldtstr. 5, 30169, Hannover, Germany.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021 Jan;29(1):284-291. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-05918-5. Epub 2020 Mar 11.
Simple elbow dislocations are accompanied with lateral ulnar collateral ligament ruptures. For persisting instability, surgery is indicated to prevent chronic posterolateral rotatory instability. After lateral collateral ligament (LCL) complex repair the repair is protected by temporary immobilization, limited range of motion and hinged bracing. Internal bracing is an operative alternative augmenting the LCL repair using non-absorbable suture tapes. However, the stability of LCL repair with and without additional augmentation remains unclear. The hypothesis was that LCL repair with additional suture tape augmentation would improve load to failure. Secondary goal of this study was to evaluate different humeral fixation techniques. A humeral fixation using separate anchors for the LCL repair and the augmentation was not expected to provide superior stability compared to using only one single anchor.
Twenty-one elbows were tested. A cyclic varus rotational torque of 0.5-3.5 Nm was applied in 90°, 60°, 30°, and 120° elbow flexion to the intact, torn, and repaired LCLs. The specimens were randomized into three groups: repair alone (group I), repair with additional internal bracing using two anchors (group II), repair using one humeral anchor (group III). A load-to-failure protocol was conducted.
Load to failure was significantly higher in groups II (26.6 Nm; P = 0.017) and III (23.18 Nm; P = 0.038) than in group I (12.13 Nm). No significant difference was observed between group II and III. All specimens lost reduction after LCL dissection by a mean of 4.48° ± 4.99° (range 0.66-15.82). The mean reduction gain after repair was 7.21° ± 4.97° (2.70-21.23; mean over reduction, 2.73°). The laxity was comparable between the intact and repaired LCLs (n.s.), except for varus movements at 30° in group II (P = 0.035) and 30° (P = 0.001) and 120° in group III (P = 0.008) with significantly less laxity. Inserting the ulnar suture anchor showed failure in the thread in 10 cases.
LCL repair with additional internal bracing yielded higher load to failure than repair alone. Repair with additional internal bracing for the humeral side using one anchor was sufficient. A higher primary stability would facilitate postoperative management and allow immediate functional treatment. Reducing the number of humeral anchors would save costs.
单纯性肘脱位伴有外侧尺侧副韧带断裂。对于持续不稳定的情况,手术是指征,以防止慢性后外侧旋转不稳定。外侧副韧带(LCL)复合体修复后,通过临时固定、限制活动范围和铰链支具来保护修复。内置支具是一种手术替代方法,使用不可吸收缝线带增强 LCL 修复。然而,LCL 修复与不增强的稳定性仍然不清楚。假设 LCL 修复与额外的缝线带增强会提高失效负载。本研究的次要目标是评估不同的肱骨固定技术。使用单独的锚定物进行 LCL 修复和增强的肱骨固定预计不会比仅使用单个单一锚定物提供更高的稳定性。
测试了 21 个肘部。在 90°、60°、30°和 120°的肘弯曲下,对完整、撕裂和修复的 LCL 施加 0.5-3.5 Nm 的循环内翻旋转扭矩。标本随机分为三组:单独修复(I 组)、使用两个锚定物进行额外内置支具修复(II 组)、使用单个肱骨锚定物进行修复(III 组)。进行失效负载协议。
与 I 组(12.13 Nm)相比,II 组(26.6 Nm;P=0.017)和 III 组(23.18 Nm;P=0.038)的失效负载明显更高。II 组和 III 组之间没有观察到显著差异。所有标本在 LCL 切开后平均丧失 4.48°±4.99°(范围 0.66-15.82)的复位。修复后的平均复位增加 7.21°±4.97°(2.70-21.23;平均过复位,2.73°)。除 II 组在 30°(P=0.035)和 30°(P=0.001)和 III 组在 120°(P=0.008)的内翻运动时 LCL 完整性和修复后的松弛度无统计学差异外,其余松弛度在完整和修复后的 LCL 之间无差异(无统计学意义)。在 10 例中,插入尺侧缝线锚钉显示缝线失效。
LCL 修复与额外的内置支具相结合比单独修复产生更高的失效负载。使用单个锚定物进行肱骨侧的额外内置支具修复是足够的。较高的初始稳定性将有助于术后管理,并允许立即进行功能治疗。减少肱骨锚钉的数量将节省成本。