Ernstbrunner Lukas, Borbas Paul, Rohner Marco, Brun Sascha, Bachmann Elias, Bouaicha Samy, Wieser Karl
Department of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
J Orthop Res. 2021 Oct;39(10):2234-2242. doi: 10.1002/jor.24963. Epub 2020 Dec 25.
We compared the construct stability of traditional knotted techniques with modern knotless anchor systems used in arthroscopically assisted latissimus dorsi transfers (aLDTs) for irreparable posterosuperior rotator cuff tears. Eighteen cadaveric shoulders were age- and gender-matched to the following three groups: knotted group (two knotted anchors); knotless group (two knotless anchors); and triple anchor group (two knotless anchors; one all-suture anchor at the apex of the humeral head). All tendons were cyclically loaded in line of the aLDT over 400 cycles followed by a load to failure test. Outcome measures were the ultimate load to failure, elongation, construct stiffness, and failure modes. The triple anchor group revealed the highest ultimate load to failure (431 ± 78 N) compared with the knotted (326 ± 52 N; p = .022) and knotless (353 ± 105 N; p = .129) groups. Total elongation and construct stiffness were not significantly different comparing all three groups. The failure modes were: anchor pull-out in all specimen of the knotted group; three (50%) anchor pull-out and three suture pull-out in the knotless group (p = .046); four (67%) anchor pull-out, one (17%) suture pull-out and one tendon pull-out in the triple anchor group. Biomechanical analyses of knotless fixation techniques for aLDTs show similar construct stability and elongation compared with the traditional, knotted techniques. Bone fixation seems to be improved with the knotless anchor systems. In our practice, we continue to use the knotless fixation technique for aLDT and in the situation of weak, osteoporotic bone, we add a third (all-suture) anchor to improve construct stability.
我们比较了传统打结技术与现代无结锚钉系统在关节镜辅助下背阔肌转移术(aLDT)治疗不可修复的后上盂唇肌腱撕裂中的结构稳定性。18具尸体肩部在年龄和性别上与以下三组匹配:打结组(两个打结锚钉);无结组(两个无结锚钉);以及三锚钉组(两个无结锚钉;一个全缝线锚钉位于肱骨头顶点)。所有肌腱均按照aLDT的方向进行400次循环加载,随后进行破坏载荷测试。结果指标包括破坏时的极限载荷、伸长率、结构刚度和破坏模式。与打结组(326±52N;p = 0.022)和无结组(353±105N;p = 0.129)相比,三锚钉组显示出最高的破坏极限载荷(431±78N)。比较所有三组,总伸长率和结构刚度无显著差异。破坏模式为:打结组所有标本均为锚钉拔出;无结组有三个(50%)锚钉拔出和三个缝线拔出(p = 0.046);三锚钉组有四个(67%)锚钉拔出、一个(17%)缝线拔出和一个肌腱拔出。aLDT无结固定技术的生物力学分析表明,与传统打结技术相比,其结构稳定性和伸长率相似。无结锚钉系统似乎改善了骨固定。在我们的实践中,我们继续在aLDT中使用无结固定技术,在骨质薄弱、骨质疏松的情况下,我们添加第三个(全缝线)锚钉以提高结构稳定性。