Koji Nagasawa1, Masahiko Noguchi, Kazuya Ikoma, Toshikazu Kubo. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kawaramachi-Hirokoji, Kamigyo-ku, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since tendons show viscoelastic behavior, dynamic viscoelastic properties should be assessed in addition to static biomechanical properties. We evaluated differences between static and dynamic biomechanical properties of the regenerating rabbit Achilles tendon following tenotomy. METHODS: At 3, 6, or 12 weeks after right Achilles tenotomy, the right (regenerating) and left (control) tendons were collected with the calcaneus from 49 rabbits. A unidirectional failure test and a dynamic viscoelastic test were conducted. FINDINGS: Tensile strength and Young's modulus (static biomechanical properties) in the regenerating group at Week 6 were significantly greater than at Week 3, while at Week 12, these were significantly greater than at Week 6. However, even at Week 12, both parameters were less than in the control group. The value of tan delta represents dynamic viscoelasticity, a smaller tan delta indicates greater elasticity. tan delta for the regenerating group was significantly greater than for the control group at Week 3, but regenerating and control groups did not significantly differ at Week 6. No marked change was seen from Weeks 6 to 12 in the regenerating group, and no significant difference in tan delta was evident between the regenerating and control groups at Week 12. INTERPRETATION: Dynamic biomechanical properties of regenerating rabbit Achilles tendons may improve more rapidly than static biomechanical properties. Ability to tolerate dynamic movement in the healing Achilles tendon may improve more rapidly than ability to withstand static stresses.
BACKGROUND: Since tendons show viscoelastic behavior, dynamic viscoelastic properties should be assessed in addition to static biomechanical properties. We evaluated differences between static and dynamic biomechanical properties of the regenerating rabbit Achilles tendon following tenotomy. METHODS: At 3, 6, or 12 weeks after right Achilles tenotomy, the right (regenerating) and left (control) tendons were collected with the calcaneus from 49 rabbits. A unidirectional failure test and a dynamic viscoelastic test were conducted. FINDINGS: Tensile strength and Young's modulus (static biomechanical properties) in the regenerating group at Week 6 were significantly greater than at Week 3, while at Week 12, these were significantly greater than at Week 6. However, even at Week 12, both parameters were less than in the control group. The value of tan delta represents dynamic viscoelasticity, a smaller tan delta indicates greater elasticity. tan delta for the regenerating group was significantly greater than for the control group at Week 3, but regenerating and control groups did not significantly differ at Week 6. No marked change was seen from Weeks 6 to 12 in the regenerating group, and no significant difference in tan delta was evident between the regenerating and control groups at Week 12. INTERPRETATION: Dynamic biomechanical properties of regenerating rabbit Achilles tendons may improve more rapidly than static biomechanical properties. Ability to tolerate dynamic movement in the healing Achilles tendon may improve more rapidly than ability to withstand static stresses.
Authors: Mathias Wulf; Mihir Shanker; Michael Schuetz; Michael Lutz; Christian M Langton; Sue L Hooper; James E Smeathers; Torsten Brauner; Scott C Wearing Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2017-06-28 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Dai Fei Elmer Ker; Dan Wang; Anthony William Behn; Evelyna Tsi Hsin Wang; Xu Zhang; Benjamin Yamin Zhou; Ángel Enrique Mercado-Pagán; Sungwoo Kim; John Kleimeyer; Burhan Gharaibeh; Yaser Shanjani; Drew Nelson; Marc Safran; Emilie Cheung; Phil Campbell; Yunzhi Peter Yang Journal: Adv Funct Mater Date: 2018-03-30 Impact factor: 18.808
Authors: Julianne Huegel; James F Boorman-Padgett; Courtney A Nuss; Mary Catherine C Minnig; Peter Y Chan; Andrew F Kuntz; Erik I Waldorff; Nianli Zhang; James T Ryaby; Louis J Soslowsky Journal: J Biomech Date: 2019-03-27 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Jack A Martin; Adam H Biedrzycki; Kenneth S Lee; Ryan J DeWall; Sabrina H Brounts; William L Murphy; Mark D Markel; Darryl G Thelen Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2015-07-26 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Shaoqun Zhang; Ji Qi; Lei Zhang; Chao Chen; Shubhro Mondal; Kaike Ping; Yili Chen; Yikai Li Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2017-02-16 Impact factor: 2.629