Lieber R L, Amiel D, Kaufman K R, Whitney J, Gelberman R H
Department of Orthopaedics, University of California, San Diego, USA.
J Hand Surg Am. 1996 Nov;21(6):957-62. doi: 10.1016/S0363-5023(96)80299-1.
To increase in vivo tendon force and gliding after flexor tendon repair, a variety of modifications to the methods by which protective passive motion is administered have been advocated. To determine the relationship between the prime variables, wrist and digital position, muscle activation, and in vivo tendon force, a clinically relevant canine model was developed. Force was measured in the flexor tendon during several joint manipulation paradigms: single-finger flexion-extension with the wrist flexed (group 1F), single-finger flexion-extension with the wrist extended (group 1E), four-finger flexion-extension with the wrist flexed (group 4F), four-finger flexion-extension with the wrist extended (group 4E), and synergistic wrist and finger motion where wrist extension and finger flexion were performed simultaneously, followed by wrist flexion and finger extension (group SYN). In addition, tendon force was measured during electric stimulation of the proximal flexor muscle mass. Passive tendon force with the wrist extended (groups 1E and 4E) was two to three times greater than that measured with the wrist flexed, independent of the number of digits moved. With the wrist extended, peak tendon force reached 1,997 g +/- 194 g during single-digit manipulation (group 1E), compared to only 853 g +/- 104 g with the wrist flexed during the same maneuver (group 1F). Statistical comparison between means revealed that groups 1E and 4E were significantly different from groups 1F, 4F, and SYN (p < .005). There were no significant differences between groups 1E and 4E or between groups 1F, 4F, and SYN (p > .200). Active muscle force elicited by electrical stimulation and passive force varied dramatically as the wrist was flexed from full extension 3460 g +/- 766 g to full flexion 427 g +/- 239 g (p < .001). Simultaneously, passive tension decreased from 940 g +/- 143 g with wrist extended to 76 g +/- 37 g with the wrist flexed. These data indicate that wrist position has the greatest effect on flexor tendon force during motions that are commonly used to rehabilitate flexor tendon repairs. Thus, if force is to be controlled during passive motion, wrist-joint angle will have the dominant effect, while the number of digits manipulated will have much less of an effect. If the clinical goal is to minimize tendon force, rehabilitation could be carried out with the wrist flexed, whereas if the goal is to increase tendon force, rehabilitation could include exercise programs that use a greater degree of wrist extension.
为了增加屈指肌腱修复术后体内肌腱的张力和滑动度,人们提出了多种对保护性被动活动实施方法的改进措施。为了确定主要变量、腕关节和手指位置、肌肉激活与体内肌腱张力之间的关系,建立了一个具有临床相关性的犬类模型。在几种关节操作范式下测量屈指肌腱的张力:腕关节屈曲时单指屈伸(1F组)、腕关节伸展时单指屈伸(1E组)、腕关节屈曲时四指屈伸(4F组)、腕关节伸展时四指屈伸(4E组),以及腕关节伸展与手指屈曲同时进行,随后腕关节屈曲与手指伸展的协同腕指运动(SYN组)。此外,在对近端屈肌肌群进行电刺激时测量肌腱张力。腕关节伸展时的被动肌腱张力(1E组和4E组)比腕关节屈曲时测量到的被动肌腱张力大两到三倍,与移动的手指数无关。腕关节伸展时,单指操作期间(1E组)肌腱峰值张力达到1997 g±194 g,而在相同操作中腕关节屈曲时仅为853 g±104 g(1F组)。均值的统计比较显示,1E组和4E组与1F组、4F组和SYN组有显著差异(p <.005)。1E组和4E组之间以及1F组、4F组和SYN组之间无显著差异(p >.200)。随着腕关节从完全伸展3460 g±766 g屈曲至完全屈曲427 g±239 g,电刺激引起的主动肌肉张力和被动张力显著变化(p <.001)。同时,被动张力从腕关节伸展时的940 g±143 g降至腕关节屈曲时的76 g±37 g。这些数据表明,在常用于屈指肌腱修复康复的运动中,腕关节位置对屈指肌腱张力影响最大。因此,如果要在被动活动期间控制张力,腕关节角度将起主导作用,而被操作的手指数影响较小。如果临床目标是使肌腱张力最小化,康复可在腕关节屈曲时进行,而如果目标是增加肌腱张力,康复可包括使用更大程度腕关节伸展的锻炼计划。