Fennell C W, Ballard J M, Pflaster D S, Adkins R H
Foothills Hospital, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Foot Ankle Int. 1995 Oct;16(10):641-5. doi: 10.1177/107110079501601011.
A multiphase biomechanical study was performed using human tibialis anterior tendons and cuboid bones, comparing the fixation of the tendon to the bone using bone anchors and bone tunnels. Twenty-six specimens were tested for ultimate load to failure comparing Mitek Superanchor fixation with no. 1 and no. 5 braided polyethelyne suture to bone tunnel fixation. Mitek Superanchor with no. 5 suture failed at 223 N, compared with Mitek Superanchor with no. 1 suture at 134 N and bone tunnel at 143 N (P = 0.033). Mitek with no. 1 suture versus bone tunnel was not significantly different. The Mitek with no. 5 suture failed at the tendon/suture interface (75%), the Mitek with no. 1 suture failed at the suture/anchor interface (56%), and bone tunnel fixation failed most commonly by fracture of the tunnel (76%). This study is the first biomechanical analysis of the pullout strengths of bone tunnels or suture anchors in the cuboid bone. We have shown that the suture anchor has a pullout strength comparable or superior to a conventional bone tunnel in an in vitro situation. We believe it is a viable alternative to fixation of the tibialis anterior tendon to the cuboid when there is insufficient tendon length or failure of the bone tunnel.
使用人体胫骨前肌腱和骰骨进行了一项多阶段生物力学研究，比较了使用骨锚和骨隧道将肌腱固定到骨上的情况。对26个标本进行了破坏极限载荷测试，比较了Mitek Superanchor固定与1号和5号编织聚乙烯缝线对骨隧道固定的情况。5号缝线的Mitek Superanchor在223 N时失效，相比之下，1号缝线的Mitek Superanchor在134 N时失效，骨隧道在143 N时失效（P = 0.033）。1号缝线的Mitek与骨隧道之间没有显著差异。5号缝线的Mitek在肌腱/缝线界面处失效（75%），1号缝线的Mitek在缝线/锚界面处失效（56%），骨隧道固定最常见的失效方式是隧道骨折（76%）。本研究是对骰骨中骨隧道或缝线锚拔出强度的首次生物力学分析。我们已经表明，在体外情况下，缝线锚的拔出强度与传统骨隧道相当或更高。我们认为，当肌腱长度不足或骨隧道失败时，它是将胫骨前肌腱固定到骰骨的一种可行替代方法。
