• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

关节缝合纽扣、可吸收螺钉和金属螺钉修复踝关节联合修复的生物力学比较:荟萃分析。

Biomechanical comparison of suture-button, bioabsorbable screw, and metal screw for ankle syndesmotic repair: A meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH 43614, USA.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH 43614, USA.

出版信息

Foot Ankle Surg. 2021 Feb;27(2):117-122. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2020.03.008. Epub 2020 Apr 27.

DOI:10.1016/j.fas.2020.03.008
PMID:32466876
Abstract

BACKGROUND

To compare biomechanically metal screw fixation to suture-button or bioabsorbable screw fixation for ankle syndesmotic injuries.

METHODS

A literature search of the comparison studies in Pubmed and Google Scholar was conducted. The biomechanical outcomes of interest were syndesmotic stability in the coronal, sagittal, and axial planes as well as torque and rotation at failure.

RESULTS

A total of 11 cadaveric studies were included. In the suture-button group, coronal displacement (MD 1.72mm, p = 0.02) and sagittal displacement (MD 2.65mm, p = 0.0003) were increased relative to the metal screw group. In contrast, no difference was found with axial rotation (MD 0.35 degrees, p = 0.57). Bioabsorbable screws exhibited equivalent failure torque (MD -3.04Nm, p = 0.53) and rotation at failure (MD 3.77 degrees, p = 0.48) in comparison to metal screws.

CONCLUSIONS

Suture-button provide less rigidity when compared to metal screw fixation. They afford flexible syndesmotic micromotion which may more closely resemble a physiological state and be helpful for ligament healing. Bioabsorbable screws demonstrate similar mechanical strength properties to metal screws.

摘要

背景

比较金属螺钉固定与缝线纽扣或可吸收螺钉固定治疗踝关节联合损伤的生物力学效果。

方法

在 Pubmed 和 Google Scholar 中对比较研究进行文献检索。关注的生物力学结果包括冠状面、矢状面和轴面的联合稳定性,以及失效时的扭矩和旋转。

结果

共纳入 11 项尸体研究。与金属螺钉组相比,缝线纽扣组的冠状面位移(MD 1.72mm,p = 0.02)和矢状面位移(MD 2.65mm,p = 0.0003)增加。而轴向旋转无差异(MD 0.35 度,p = 0.57)。与金属螺钉相比,可吸收螺钉在失效扭矩(MD -3.04Nm,p = 0.53)和失效时的旋转(MD 3.77 度,p = 0.48)方面表现出相当的机械强度。

结论

与金属螺钉固定相比,缝线纽扣固定的刚度较低。它们提供了灵活的联合微动,更接近生理状态,有助于韧带愈合。可吸收螺钉的机械强度特性与金属螺钉相似。

相似文献

1
Biomechanical comparison of suture-button, bioabsorbable screw, and metal screw for ankle syndesmotic repair: A meta-analysis.关节缝合纽扣、可吸收螺钉和金属螺钉修复踝关节联合修复的生物力学比较:荟萃分析。
Foot Ankle Surg. 2021 Feb;27(2):117-122. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2020.03.008. Epub 2020 Apr 27.
2
Arthroscopically measured syndesmotic stability after screw vs. suture button fixation in a cadaveric model.在尸体模型中,对比螺钉与缝线纽扣固定后关节镜测量下的下胫腓联合稳定性。
Injury. 2017 Nov;48(11):2433-2437. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.08.066. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
3
Biomechanical Analysis of a Novel Syndesmotic Plate Compared With Traditional Screw and Suture Button Fixation.新型下胫腓联合板与传统螺钉和缝线纽扣固定的生物力学分析。
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2020 May-Jun;59(3):522-528. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2019.07.025. Epub 2019 Dec 19.
4
Suture-button versus screw fixation of the syndesmosis: a biomechanical analysis.缝线纽扣与螺钉固定距骨下关节:生物力学分析。
Foot Ankle Int. 2010 Jan;31(1):69-75. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2010.0069.
5
Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Current Ankle Syndesmosis Repair Techniques.三种当前踝关节下胫腓联合修复技术的生物力学比较
Foot Ankle Int. 2017 Feb;38(2):200-207. doi: 10.1177/1071100716666278. Epub 2016 Oct 1.
6
Biomechanical comparison of syndesmotic injury fixation methods using a cadaveric model.利用尸体模型进行的踝关节损伤固定方法的生物力学比较。
Foot Ankle Int. 2013 Dec;34(12):1710-7. doi: 10.1177/1071100713503816. Epub 2013 Sep 9.
7
Suture-button versus screw fixation in a syndesmosis rupture model: a biomechanical comparison.下胫腓联合损伤模型中缝线纽扣与螺钉固定的生物力学比较
Foot Ankle Int. 2009 Apr;30(4):346-52. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2009.0346.
8
A systematic review of suture-button versus syndesmotic screw in the treatment of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injury.缝线纽扣与下胫腓螺钉治疗下胫腓联合损伤的系统评价
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Jul 4;18(1):286. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1645-7.
9
Three-Dimensional Analysis of Fibular Motion After Fixation of Syndesmotic Injuries With a Screw or Suture-Button Construct.使用螺钉或缝线纽扣结构固定下胫腓联合损伤后腓骨运动的三维分析
Foot Ankle Int. 2016 Dec;37(12):1350-1356. doi: 10.1177/1071100716666865. Epub 2016 Sep 20.
10
Ankle joint contact loads and displacement in syndesmosis injuries repaired with Tightropes compared to screw fixation in a static model.在静态模型中,与螺钉固定相比,使用 Tightrope 修复的下胫腓联合损伤的踝关节关节接触负荷和位移。
Injury. 2019 Nov;50(11):1901-1907. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.09.012. Epub 2019 Sep 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Routine Removal of Syndesmotic Screws After Tibiofibular Syndesmosis Fixation Does Not Affect Patient Function and Is Associated with a Higher Risk of Postoperative Complications.胫腓下联合固定后常规取出下胫腓螺钉不影响患者功能,但与术后并发症风险较高相关。
J Clin Med. 2025 May 8;14(10):3276. doi: 10.3390/jcm14103276.
2
Primary Ankle Fracture Dislocation Is Not a Negative Prognostic Factor for the Surgical Treatment of Syndesmotic Injury-A Retrospective Analysis of 246 Patients.原发性踝关节骨折脱位并非下胫腓联合损伤手术治疗的不良预后因素——246例患者的回顾性分析
J Clin Med. 2025 Feb 12;14(4):1215. doi: 10.3390/jcm14041215.
3
[Fractures of the upper ankle joint].
[踝关节上关节骨折]
Chirurgie (Heidelb). 2025 Mar;96(3):254-268. doi: 10.1007/s00104-024-02229-0. Epub 2025 Feb 14.
4
A 3-Ligament Syndesmotic Injury Is at Higher Risk for Malreduction Than a 2-Ligament Injury: A CT-Based Analysis.三踝联合损伤比双踝损伤更容易出现复位不良:基于 CT 的分析。
Foot Ankle Int. 2024 Aug;45(8):812-821. doi: 10.1177/10711007241238227. Epub 2024 May 30.
5
Better outcomes using suture button compared to screw fixation in talofibular syndesmotic injuries of the ankle: a level I evidence-based meta-analysis.与螺钉固定相比,使用缝合扣在距腓联合损伤中的应用效果更好:一项基于 I 级证据的荟萃分析。
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Jun;144(6):2641-2653. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05354-x. Epub 2024 May 13.
6
Syndesmotic screws, unscrew them, or leave them? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.下胫腓螺钉,取出还是保留?一项关于随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Orthop. 2024 Mar 22;54:136-142. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.03.012. eCollection 2024 Aug.
7
Chronic syndesmotic instability - Current evidence on management.慢性下胫腓联合不稳定——当前治疗证据
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2024 Feb 23;50:102382. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2024.102382. eCollection 2024 Mar.
8
The Radiological Anatomy of the Distal Tibiofibular Joint: A Retrospective Computed Tomography Study.胫腓远侧关节的放射学解剖:一项回顾性计算机断层扫描研究
Cureus. 2024 Feb 4;16(2):e53540. doi: 10.7759/cureus.53540. eCollection 2024 Feb.
9
Current concepts in ankle fractures.踝关节骨折的当前概念
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2023 Oct 16;45:102260. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2023.102260. eCollection 2023 Oct.
10
Predictors of Hardware Removal in Orthopaedic Trauma Patients Undergoing Syndesmotic Ankle Fixation With Screws.接受踝关节下胫腓联合螺钉固定的创伤骨科患者内固定取出的预测因素
Foot Ankle Orthop. 2023 Sep 16;8(3):24730114231198841. doi: 10.1177/24730114231198841. eCollection 2023 Jul.