PURPOSE: New, stronger suture materials have been introduced for flexor tendon surgery. The advantage of these materials can be lost if the suture loop pulls out from the tendon. The aim of this study was to compare the ability of various locking loops to grip the tendon. METHODS: We inserted 4 different standard and 2 experimental locking loops with 200-μm nitinol wire into human cadaveric flexor digitorum profundus tendons. The standard loops were: group 1, cruciate; group 2, Pennington modified Kessler; group 3, cross-stitch; and group 4, Lim-Tsai. The experimental loops were: group 5, a composition of Pennington modified Kessler with a cross-stitch loop; and group 6, a locking Kessler type of loop with a superficial transverse component. We loaded the loops until failure. We recorded the pull-out strength and stiffness and documented failure mechanisms during the pull-out test. RESULTS: The cruciate loop had the weakest holding capacity, 20 N, which was significantly less than in groups 2 to 6. The cross-stitch loop, Lim-Tsai loop, and modified Kessler loop performed similarly (36 N, 37 N, and 39 N, respectively). The experimental loops had the highest pull-out strength (group 5, 59 N; and group 6, 60 N, both significantly greater than groups 1 to 4). The mode of failure was pull-out for all of the standard loops and 7 of the experimental loops. Of 20 experimental loops, 13 failed by suture rupture. CONCLUSIONS: The 2 experimental loop configurations demonstrated higher pull-out strength and may have advantages when used with newer and stronger suture materials. The number of the locking components in the loops and the way the tension is transmitted to the tendon fibrils explain the results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The loops presented in this study and that grip the tendon better may be useful with new materials that have high tensile strength.
PURPOSE: New, stronger suture materials have been introduced for flexor tendon surgery. The advantage of these materials can be lost if the suture loop pulls out from the tendon. The aim of this study was to compare the ability of various locking loops to grip the tendon. METHODS: We inserted 4 different standard and 2 experimental locking loops with 200-μm nitinol wire into human cadaveric flexor digitorum profundus tendons. The standard loops were: group 1, cruciate; group 2, Pennington modified Kessler; group 3, cross-stitch; and group 4, Lim-Tsai. The experimental loops were: group 5, a composition of Pennington modified Kessler with a cross-stitch loop; and group 6, a locking Kessler type of loop with a superficial transverse component. We loaded the loops until failure. We recorded the pull-out strength and stiffness and documented failure mechanisms during the pull-out test. RESULTS: The cruciate loop had the weakest holding capacity, 20 N, which was significantly less than in groups 2 to 6. The cross-stitch loop, Lim-Tsai loop, and modified Kessler loop performed similarly (36 N, 37 N, and 39 N, respectively). The experimental loops had the highest pull-out strength (group 5, 59 N; and group 6, 60 N, both significantly greater than groups 1 to 4). The mode of failure was pull-out for all of the standard loops and 7 of the experimental loops. Of 20 experimental loops, 13 failed by suture rupture. CONCLUSIONS: The 2 experimental loop configurations demonstrated higher pull-out strength and may have advantages when used with newer and stronger suture materials. The number of the locking components in the loops and the way the tension is transmitted to the tendon fibrils explain the results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The loops presented in this study and that grip the tendon better may be useful with new materials that have high tensile strength.
Authors: Ryan P Calfee; Sean Boone; Jeffrey G Stepan; Daniel A Osei; Stavros Thomopoulos; Martin I Boyer Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2015-03-20 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Daniel A Osei; Jeffrey G Stepan; Ryan P Calfee; Stavros Thomopoulos; Martin I Boyer; Ryan Potter; Richard H Gelberman Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2013-12-15 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Susumu Yoneda; Hirotaka Okubo; Stephen W Linderman; Nozomu Kusano; Matthew J Silva; Stavros Thomopoulos; Fuminori Kanaya; Richard H Gelberman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-05 Impact factor: 3.240