Literature DB >> 23453895

Analysis of a knotless flexor tendon repair using a multifilament stainless steel cable-crimp system.

Leonard Gordon1, Jun Matsui, Erik McDonald, Joshua A Gordon, Ronald Neimkin.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the biomechanical and technical properties of flexor tendon repairs using a 4-strand cruciate FiberWire (FW) repair and a 2-strand multifilament stainless steel (MFSS) single cross-lock cable-crimp system.
METHODS: Eight tests were conducted for each type of repair using cadaver hand flexor digitorum profundus tendons. We measured the required surgical exposure, repair time, and force of flexion (friction) with a custom motor system with an inline load cell and measured ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and 2-mm gap force on a servo-hydraulic testing machine.
RESULTS: Repair time averaged less than 7 minutes for the 2-strand MFSS cable crimp repairs and 12 minutes for the FW repairs. The FW repair was performed with 2 cm of exposure and removal of the C-1 and A-3 pulleys. The C-1 and A-3 pulleys were retained in each of the MFSS cable crimp repairs with less than 1 cm of exposure. Following the FW repair, the average increase in friction was 89% compared with an average of 53% for the MFSS repairs. Six of the 8 MFSS specimens achieved the UTS before any gap had occurred, whereas all of the FW repairs had more than 2 mm of gap before the UTS, indicating that the MFSS was a stiffer repair. The average UTS appeared similar for both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: We describe a 2-strand multifilament stainless steel single cross-lock cable crimp flexor repair system. In our studies of this cable crimp system, we found that surgical exposure, average repair times, and friction were reduced compared to the traditional 4-strand cruciate FW repair. While demonstrating these benefits, the crimp repair also produced a stiff construct and high UTS and 2-mm gap force. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A cable crimp flexor tendon repair may offer an attractive alternative to current repair methods. The benefits may be important especially for flexor tendon repair in zone 2 or for the repair of multiple tendons.
Copyright © 2013 American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23453895     DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.01.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hand Surg Am        ISSN: 0363-5023            Impact factor:   2.230


  3 in total

Review 1.  Biomechanical comparison of double grasping repair versus cross-locked cruciate flexor tendon repair.

Authors:  C Liam Dwyer; D Dean Dominy; Timothy E Cooney; Richard Englund; Leonard Gordon; John D Lubahn
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2015-03

2.  Comparing Biomechanical Properties, Repair Times, and Value of Common Core Flexor Tendon Repairs.

Authors:  Aakash Chauhan; Patrick Schimoler; Mark C Miller; Alexander Kharlamov; Gregory A Merrell; Bradley A Palmer
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2017-04-19

3.  Practice Patterns in Operative Flexor Tendon Laceration Repair: A 15-Year Analysis of Continuous Certification Data from the American Board of Plastic Surgery.

Authors:  Joshua P Weissman; Daniel C Sasson; Ava G Chappell; Steven L Moran; Arun K Gosain
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2022-10-07
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.