Suppr超能文献

用于伴有骨质缺损的肩关节不稳的非螺钉式肩胛盂增强结构:静态和弹性环扎结构的生物力学评估

Non-screw glenoid augmentation constructs for shoulder instability with bone loss: A biomechanical assessment of static and elastic cerclage constructs.

作者信息

Paul Kyle, Manfredi John N, Hargreaves Mathew, Messner Mitchell K, Rahaman Clay A, Ponce Brent, Momaya Amit M, Brabston Eugene

机构信息

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, San Antonio, TX, USA.

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Birmingham, AL, USA.

出版信息

J Orthop. 2024 Dec 24;66:1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.12.021. eCollection 2025 Aug.

Abstract

PURPOSE

This study aims to compare the biomechanical performance of elastic and static suture-based cerclage systems to traditional screw constructs in the setting of modeled glenoid bony augmentation.

METHODS

Biomechanical testing was conducted on polyurethane cellular foam blocks modeling a 20 % glenoid defect repaired with a coracoid graft. Constructs consisted of an elastic suture-based cerclage, static suture-based cerclage, and a two-screw construct. Biomechanical testing was performed on material testing system, using a 7-phase, 100 cycle per phase, 1Hz, sinusoidal cyclic loading protocol, following a stair-step pattern in load control. Failure for cyclic loading was assessed at 0.8 mm linear displacement. The absolute end level for load-to-failure was 7.0 mm.

RESULTS

Static suture-based cerclage failed at 5-50 N (Cycles 2 through 4), 2-screw constructs failed at 25-50 N (Cycle 4), and elastic suture-based cerclage failed at 100-200N (Cycles 6 and 7). Elastic cerclage exhibited superior performance compared to static cerclage beginning in Cycle 2 (p = 0.0440) and compared to SOC 2-screw construct beginning in Cycle 4 (p = 0.0118). 2-screw construct exhibited superior stability performance compared to static cerclage beginning in Cycle 3 (p = 0.0001). Elastic cerclage reached failure at 558.141 ± 4.508 N, while 2-screw construct and static cerclage reached failure at 422.009 ± 24.998 N and 366.770 ± 66.653 N, respectively. Elastic cerclage demonstrated superior biomechanical stability in load-at-failure performance to static cerclage (p < 0.0001) and the screw construct (p < 0.0001), while static cerclage demonstrated inferior biomechanical stability to the screw construct (p = 0.0343).

CONCLUSION

This biomechanical study comparing the performance of elastic cable and static suture tape cerclage fixation methods identified that the elastic cable cerclage exhibits a higher load-at-failure and less displacement under repetitive stress. In addition, elastic cable cerclage fixation exhibits greater strength and construct rigidity than traditional metal screw fixation.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较弹性和静态缝线环扎系统与传统螺钉结构在模拟肩胛盂骨增强情况下的生物力学性能。

方法

在模拟20%肩胛盂缺损并用喙突移植修复的聚氨酯泡沫块上进行生物力学测试。结构包括弹性缝线环扎、静态缝线环扎和双螺钉结构。在材料测试系统上进行生物力学测试,采用7个阶段、每个阶段100次循环、1Hz、正弦循环加载方案,遵循载荷控制的阶梯模式。循环加载失败的评估标准为线性位移0.8mm。失效的绝对终点水平为7.0mm。

结果

静态缝线环扎在5 - 50N(第2至4个循环)时失效,双螺钉结构在25 - 50N(第4个循环)时失效,弹性缝线环扎在100 - 200N(第6和7个循环)时失效。从第2个循环开始,弹性环扎与静态环扎相比表现出更好的性能(p = 0.0440),从第4个循环开始与标准双螺钉结构相比也表现出更好的性能(p = 0.0118)。从第3个循环开始,双螺钉结构与静态环扎相比表现出更好的稳定性性能(p = 0.0001)。弹性环扎在558.141±4.508N时达到失效,而双螺钉结构和静态环扎分别在422.009±24.998N和366.770±66.653N时达到失效。弹性环扎在失效载荷性能方面表现出比静态环扎(p < 0.0001)和螺钉结构(p < 0.0001)更好的生物力学稳定性,而静态环扎表现出比螺钉结构更低的生物力学稳定性(p = 0.0343)。

结论

这项比较弹性缆线和静态缝线带环扎固定方法性能的生物力学研究表明,弹性缆线环扎在失效载荷下更高且在重复应力下位移更小。此外,弹性缆线环扎固定比传统金属螺钉固定表现出更大的强度和结构刚度。

相似文献

2
Biomechanical Outcomes of Glenoid Bone Graft Fixation Techniques: A Systematic Review.
Am J Sports Med. 2025 Jul;53(8):2013-2021. doi: 10.1177/03635465241278328. Epub 2025 Jan 9.
7
Biomechanical Comparison Between Fixation Techniques for First-Metatarsophalangeal Joint Arthrodesis.
Foot Ankle Int. 2025 Aug;46(8):895-902. doi: 10.1177/10711007251341886. Epub 2025 Jun 28.

本文引用的文献

3
A Systematic Review of Screw and Suture Button Glenoid Augmentation Constructs.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2023 Oct 12;11(10):23259671231186429. doi: 10.1177/23259671231186429. eCollection 2023 Oct.
5
Complications Related to Latarjet Shoulder Stabilization: Response.
Am J Sports Med. 2023 Aug;51(10):NP31-NP32. doi: 10.1177/03635465231178011.
6
How much force is acting on the shoulder joint to create a Hill-Sachs Lesion or reverse Hill-Sachs Lesion?
J Orthop Sci. 2023 Nov;28(6):1252-1257. doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2022.09.016. Epub 2022 Oct 22.
8
Failure of Primary Distal Biceps Repair After Cortical Button Fixation With Whipstitch Technique: A Root Cause Analysis.
Cureus. 2022 Jan 14;14(1):e21254. doi: 10.7759/cureus.21254. eCollection 2022 Jan.
9
Tensioning device increases coracoid bone block healing rates in arthroscopic Latarjet procedure with suture-button fixation.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2022 Jul;31(7):1451-1462. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2022.01.126. Epub 2022 Feb 13.
10
Factors affecting biomechanical strength of Latarjet constructs: A systematic review and meta-regression.
Shoulder Elbow. 2022 Feb;14(1):17-23. doi: 10.1177/1758573220960462. Epub 2020 Sep 21.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验