• 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

在猪胸大肌下肱二头肌固定模型中,高强度胶带比高强度缝线显示出更大的极限破坏载荷和更小的刚度。

High-Tensile Strength Tapes Show Greater Ultimate Failure Load and Less Stiffness Than High-Tensile Strength Sutures in a Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Porcine Model.

作者信息

Hong Chih-Kai, Su Wei-Ren, Kuan Fa-Chuan, Chen Yueh, Chiang Chen-Hao, Hsu Kai-Lan

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan.

Skeleton Materials and Bio-compatibility Core Lab, Research Center of Clinical Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan.

出版信息

Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2020 Oct 15;2(6):e795-e801. doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2020.07.018. eCollection 2020 Dec.

DOI:10.1016/j.asmr.2020.07.018
PMID:33376994
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7754602/
Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the biomechanical properties of high-tensile strength tape and a high-tensile strength suture in subpectoral biceps tenodesis using a suture anchor in a porcine tendon model.

METHODS

A total of 24 artificial composite (polymer and glass fiber) humeri and porcine flexor profundus tendons were used. Two types of suture materials, high-tensile strength sutures (group S) and high-tensile strength tapes (group T), were evaluated. After we inserted metallic suture anchors with either 2 sutures or tapes 5 cm from the superomedial corner of the greater tuberosity, a Krackow suture technique was used to secure the tendons. After a preload of 5 N for 2 minutes, a cyclic loading test from 5 to 70 N was conducted for 500 cycles. Finally, the specimen was loaded to failure at a rate of 1 mm/s.

RESULTS

There were no significant between-group differences in elongation after cyclic loading and elongation at failure load for group S and group T ( = .977 and .630, respectively). The ultimate failure loads in group T (278.2 ± 54 N) were significantly greater than those in group S (249.4 ± 32 N) ( = .028). In contrast, the stiffness values in group T (28.5 ± 4.0 N/mm) were significantly lower than those in group S (32.3 ± 4.5 N) ( = .028). Ten specimens in group S and 8 specimens in group T failed, with tendons being cut through by the sutures, whereas the other 2 specimens in group S and 4 specimens in group T failed due to suture breakage.

CONCLUSIONS

Using high-tensile strength tapes in subpectoral biceps tenodesis using a suture anchor leads to significantly greater ultimate failure load as compared with using high-tensile strength sutures in a porcine model. Although lower levels of stiffness were found in high-tensile strength tape group, the difference in the means were not large between 2 groups.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A strong suture-tendon structure may prevent clinical failure of a subpectoral biceps tenodesis using a suture anchor.

摘要

目的

在猪肌腱模型中,使用缝合锚钉比较胸大肌下肱二头肌肌腱固定术中高强度胶带和高强度缝线的生物力学性能。

方法

总共使用了24个人造复合(聚合物和玻璃纤维)肱骨及猪的指深屈肌腱。评估了两种缝合材料,即高强度缝线(S组)和高强度胶带(T组)。在从大结节的上内侧角5厘米处插入带有2根缝线或胶带的金属缝合锚钉后,采用Krackow缝合技术固定肌腱。在5 N的预负荷下持续2分钟后,进行从5至70 N的循环加载试验,共500个循环。最后,以1 mm/s的速率对标本加载直至破坏。

结果

S组和T组在循环加载后的伸长率以及破坏载荷下的伸长率方面,组间差异均无统计学意义(分别为P = 0.977和P = 0.630)。T组的极限破坏载荷(278.2±54 N)显著高于S组(249.4±32 N)(P = 0.028)。相反,T组的刚度值(28.5±4.0 N/mm)显著低于S组(32.3±4.5 N)(P = 0.028)。S组有10个标本和T组有8个标本发生破坏,肌腱被缝线切断,而S组的另外2个标本和T组的4个标本因缝线断裂而破坏。

结论

在猪模型中,在胸大肌下肱二头肌肌腱固定术中使用高强度胶带与使用高强度缝线相比,可导致显著更高的极限破坏载荷。尽管高强度胶带组的刚度水平较低,但两组之间的均值差异不大。

临床意义

牢固的缝线-肌腱结构可能会防止使用缝合锚钉的胸大肌下肱二头肌肌腱固定术出现临床失败。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/85fe42ac786e/gr4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/68b60500bcf3/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/94dc253176e6/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/17a006ad5d26/gr3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/85fe42ac786e/gr4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/68b60500bcf3/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/94dc253176e6/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/17a006ad5d26/gr3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac99/7754602/85fe42ac786e/gr4.jpg

相似文献

1
High-Tensile Strength Tapes Show Greater Ultimate Failure Load and Less Stiffness Than High-Tensile Strength Sutures in a Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Porcine Model.在猪胸大肌下肱二头肌固定模型中,高强度胶带比高强度缝线显示出更大的极限破坏载荷和更小的刚度。
Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2020 Oct 15;2(6):e795-e801. doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2020.07.018. eCollection 2020 Dec.
2
The Double Krackow Suture Technique Does Not Offer a Significant Benefit Compared to the Krackow Suture Technique in Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Using a Double-Loaded Suture Anchor.双 Krackow 缝合技术与使用双加载缝合锚的胸小肌下肱二头肌肌腱固定的 Krackow 缝合技术相比,没有显著优势。
Arthroscopy. 2020 Mar;36(3):701-707. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.11.097. Epub 2020 Jan 20.
3
Biomechanical Comparison of Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Onlay Techniques.胸大肌下肱二头肌肌腱固定覆盖技术的生物力学比较
Orthop J Sports Med. 2019 Oct 15;7(10):2325967119876276. doi: 10.1177/2325967119876276. eCollection 2019 Oct.
4
Biomechanical Analysis of All-Suture Suture Anchor Fixation Compared With Conventional Suture Anchors and Interference Screws for Biceps Tenodesis.全缝线锚钉固定与传统缝线锚钉和骨内螺钉固定修复肱二头肌肌腱止点的生物力学分析。
Arthroscopy. 2019 Jun;35(6):1760-1768. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.01.026. Epub 2019 May 6.
5
All-suture anchor size and drill angle influence load to failure in a porcine model of subpectoral biceps tenodesis, a biomechanical study.全缝线锚钉大小和钻孔角度对猪模型下胸肌二头肌肌腱固定术失效负荷的影响:一项生物力学研究。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 May 23;25(1):408. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07503-0.
6
Biomechanical Comparison of All-Suture Anchor Fixation and Interference Screw Technique for Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.胸大肌下肱二头肌肌腱固定术的全缝线锚钉固定与挤压螺钉技术的生物力学比较
Arthroscopy. 2016 Jul;32(7):1247-52. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2016.01.016. Epub 2016 Apr 1.
7
Interference screw versus suture anchor fixation for subpectoral tenodesis of the proximal biceps tendon: a cadaveric study.干扰螺钉与缝线锚钉固定用于肱二头肌近端肌腱胸大肌下固定术的尸体研究
Arthroscopy. 2008 Oct;24(10):1103-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2008.05.005. Epub 2008 Jun 16.
8
Biomechanical properties of suprapectoral biceps tenodesis with double-anchor knotless luggage tag sutures vs. subpectoral biceps tenodesis with single-anchor whipstitch suture using all-suture anchors.使用全缝线锚钉的双锚无结行李牌缝线胸大肌上肱二头肌固定术与单锚锁边缝线胸大肌下肱二头肌固定术的生物力学特性比较
JSES Int. 2023 Aug 3;7(6):2393-2399. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.07.013. eCollection 2023 Nov.
9
Biomechanical evaluation of subpectoral biceps tenodesis: dual suture anchor versus interference screw fixation.经胸小肌下入路双缝线锚钉与挤压螺钉固定治疗肱二头肌长头腱止点撕脱性损伤的生物力学比较
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Oct;22(10):1408-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.12.039. Epub 2013 Feb 15.
10
Increased Load to Failure in Biceps Tenodesis With All-Suture Suture Anchor Compared With Interference Screw: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Study.与骨内螺钉相比,全缝线锚钉固定肱二头肌肌腱止点的失效负荷增加:一项尸体生物力学研究。
Arthroscopy. 2021 Oct;37(10):3016-3021. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.03.085. Epub 2021 Apr 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Biomechanical Characterization of a New Locking Loop Stitch for Graft Fixation versus Krackow Stitch.新型锁定环缝线固定移植物的生物力学特性与 Krackow 缝线比较。
Clin Orthop Surg. 2023 Jun;15(3):508-515. doi: 10.4055/cios22134. Epub 2023 Mar 27.

本文引用的文献

1
The Double Krackow Suture Technique Does Not Offer a Significant Benefit Compared to the Krackow Suture Technique in Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Using a Double-Loaded Suture Anchor.双 Krackow 缝合技术与使用双加载缝合锚的胸小肌下肱二头肌肌腱固定的 Krackow 缝合技术相比,没有显著优势。
Arthroscopy. 2020 Mar;36(3):701-707. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.11.097. Epub 2020 Jan 20.
2
Lesions of the Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Concomitant with Rotator Cuff Tears: Tenotomy or Subpectoral Mini-open Tenodesis? A Comparative Short to Mid-term Follow-up Study.肱二头肌长头腱病变合并肩袖撕裂:腱切断术还是胸小肌下微创切开固定术?一项短期至中期随访比较研究。
Orthop Surg. 2019 Oct;11(5):857-863. doi: 10.1111/os.12536. Epub 2019 Sep 18.
3
Suture Tape With Broad Full-Width Core Versus Traditional Round Suture With Round Core: A Mechanical Comparison.
宽全宽芯缝线与传统圆芯缝线的机械比较
Arthroscopy. 2019 Aug;35(8):2461-2466. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.03.053.
4
Biomechanical Analysis of All-Suture Suture Anchor Fixation Compared With Conventional Suture Anchors and Interference Screws for Biceps Tenodesis.全缝线锚钉固定与传统缝线锚钉和骨内螺钉固定修复肱二头肌肌腱止点的生物力学分析。
Arthroscopy. 2019 Jun;35(6):1760-1768. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.01.026. Epub 2019 May 6.
5
Is arthroscopic repair superior to biceps tenotomy and tenodesis for type II SLAP lesions? A meta-analysis of RCTs and observational studies.对于II型SLAP损伤,关节镜修复术是否优于肱二头肌肌腱切断术和肌腱固定术?一项随机对照试验和观察性研究的荟萃分析。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2019 Feb 13;14(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1096-y.
6
Biomechanical properties of suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: double knotless screw fixation is superior to single knotless screw fixation.胸上二头肌固定术的生物力学特性:双无结螺钉固定优于单无结螺钉固定。
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2018 Aug;138(8):1127-1134. doi: 10.1007/s00402-018-2927-8. Epub 2018 May 16.
7
Mechanical and imaging evaluation of the effect of sutures on tendons: tape sutures are protective to suture pulling through tendon.缝线对肌腱作用的力学和影像学评估:带线缝线对缝线穿出肌腱有保护作用。
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018 Sep;27(9):1705-1710. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2018.03.004. Epub 2018 May 11.
8
Biomechanical Evaluation of a Transtendinous All-Suture Anchor Technique Versus Interference Screw Technique for Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis in a Cadaveric Model.经关节腱骨固定术治疗肩袖撕裂的生物力学评估。
Arthroscopy. 2018 Jun;34(6):1755-1761. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2018.01.007. Epub 2018 Feb 23.
9
Mini-open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Using a Suture Anchor.使用缝线锚钉的小切口胸小肌下肱二头肌固定术
Arthrosc Tech. 2017 Sep 18;6(5):e1625-e1631. doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2017.06.019. eCollection 2017 Oct.
10
Long Head of Biceps Tendon Management: a Survey of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons.肱二头肌长头肌腱的处理:美国肩肘外科医生的一项调查
HSS J. 2018 Feb;14(1):34-40. doi: 10.1007/s11420-017-9575-3. Epub 2017 Oct 13.