PURPOSE: A study on 36 cadaveric Achilles tendons was undertaken to compare different Achilles tendon repairs. METHODS: The strength of the repair and the gapping resistance were tested under different standardized experimental conditions. Each matched pair of cadaveric Achilles tendons was randomly repaired in the original Ma-Griffith configuration and in the new modified configuration and loaded to failure. Using a special equipment, the force displacement curve was measured. RESULTS: Under different experimental conditions, the new modified technique presented in the paper provided significantly greater tensile strength and gapping resistance than the original Ma-Griffith repair configuration. CONCLUSION: The results of this study may be clinically relevant in terms of choice of the percutaneous method used for the repair of the ruptured Achilles tendon.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: A study on 36 cadaveric Achilles tendons was undertaken to compare different Achilles tendon repairs. METHODS: The strength of the repair and the gapping resistance were tested under different standardized experimental conditions. Each matched pair of cadaveric Achilles tendons was randomly repaired in the original Ma-Griffith configuration and in the new modified configuration and loaded to failure. Using a special equipment, the force displacement curve was measured. RESULTS: Under different experimental conditions, the new modified technique presented in the paper provided significantly greater tensile strength and gapping resistance than the original Ma-Griffith repair configuration. CONCLUSION: The results of this study may be clinically relevant in terms of choice of the percutaneous method used for the repair of the ruptured Achilles tendon.
Authors: Patrick Sadoghi; Claudio Rosso; Victor Valderrabano; Andreas Leithner; Patrick Vavken Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2012-03-31 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Michael Mullaney; Timothy F Tyler; Malachy McHugh; Karl Orishimo; Ian Kremenic; Jessica Caggiano; Abi Ramsey Journal: Sports Health Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 3.843
Authors: Stephan Frosch; Gottfried Buchhorn; Thelonius Hawellek; Tim Alexander Walde; Wolfgang Lehmann; Jan Hubert Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Robert Kraemer; Johan Lorenzen; Robert Rotter; Peter M Vogt; Karsten Knobloch Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2009-08-12 Impact factor: 2.359