首页> 外文期刊>The journal of knee surgery >Quadriceps tendon rupture: a biomechanical comparison of transosseous equivalent double-row suture anchor versus transosseous tunnel repair.
【24h】

Quadriceps tendon rupture: a biomechanical comparison of transosseous equivalent double-row suture anchor versus transosseous tunnel repair.

机译:股四头肌腱断裂:骨等效双行缝合锚钉与骨间隧道修复的生物力学比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Quadriceps rupture off the patella is traditionally repaired by a transosseous tunnel technique, although a single-row suture anchor repair has recently been described. This study biomechanically tested a new transosseous equivalent (TE) double-row suture anchor technique compared with the transosseous repair for quadriceps repair. After simulated quadriceps-patella avulsion in 10 matched cadaveric knees, repairs were completed by either a three tunnel transosseous (TT = 5) or a TE suture anchor (TE = 5) technique. Double-row repairs were done using two 5.5 Bio-Corkscrew FT (fully threaded) (Arthrex, Inc., Naples, FL, USA) and two 3.5 Bio-PushLock anchors (Arthrex, Inc., Naples, FL, USA) with all 10 repairs done with #2 FiberWire suture (Arthrex, Inc., Naples, FL). Cyclic testing from 50 to 250 N for 250 cycles and pull to failure load (1 mm/s) were undertaken. Gap formation and ultimate tensile load (N) were recorded and stiffness data (N/mm) were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using a Mann-Whitney U test and survival characteristics examined with Kaplan-Meier test. No significant difference was found between the TE and TT groups in stiffness (TE = 134 +/- 15 N/mm, TT = 132 +/- 26 N/mm, p = 0.28). The TE group had significantly less ultimate tensile load (N) compared with the TT group (TE = 447 +/- 86 N, TT = 591 +/- 84 N, p = 0.04), with all failures occurring at the suture eyelets. Although both quadriceps repairs were sufficiently strong, the transosseous repairs were stronger than the TE suture anchor repairs. The repair stiffness and gap formation were similar between the groups.
机译:尽管最近已描述了单行缝合锚钉修复,但传统上通过股骨隧道技术修复off骨股四头肌破裂。这项研究通过生物力学测试了一种新的跨骨等效(TE)双排缝合锚固技术,并将其与股四头肌修复的跨骨修复相比较。在10个匹配的尸体膝盖中模拟股四头肌-pat骨撕脱后,通过三隧道穿骨(TT = 5)或TE缝合锚钉(TE = 5)技术完成修复。使用两个5.5 Bio-Corkscrew FT(全螺纹)(Arthrex,Inc.,那不勒斯,佛罗里达州,美国)和两个3.5 Bio-PushLock锚(Arthrex,Inc.,那不勒斯,佛罗里达州,美国)进行双排修理。 #2 FiberWire缝合线(佛罗里达州那不勒斯市Arthrex公司)进行了10次修理。从50 N到250 N进行了250次循环循环测试,并将其拉至失效载荷(1 mm / s)。记录间隙形成和极限拉伸载荷(N),并计算刚度数据(N / mm)。使用Mann-Whitney U检验进行统计学分析,并通过Kaplan-Meier检验检验生存特征。在TE和TT组之间,刚度没有发现明显差异(TE = 134 +/- 15 N / mm,TT = 132 +/- 26 N / mm,p = 0.28)。与TT组(TE = 447 +/- 86 N,TT = 591 +/- 84 N,p = 0.04)相比,TE组的极限拉伸载荷(N)明显更少,所有的断裂都发生在缝合线孔眼上。尽管两个股四头肌修复都足够牢固,但骨间修复比TE缝线锚固修复要强。两组之间的修复刚度和间隙形成相似。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号