Atesch Ateschrang1, Christoph Salewski1, Marc-Daniel Ahrend1, Anna Janine Schreiner2, Michael T Hirschmann3, Ulrich Stöckle1, Sufian S Ahmad4. 1. Department of Traumatology and Reconstructive Surgery, BG Trauma Center Tübingen, Eberhard-Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 2. Department of Traumatology and Reconstructive Surgery, BG Trauma Center Tübingen, Eberhard-Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. ascheiner@bgu-tuebingen.de. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Kantonsspital Baselland (Bruderholz, Liestal, Laufen), Bruderholz, Switzerland. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Inselspital, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Most biomechanical investigations of tendon repairs were based on output measures from hydraulic loading machines, therefore, accounting for construct failure rather than true gapping within the rupture zone. It was hypothesized that the elastic capacity of a tendon-repair construct influences the force necessary to induce gapping. METHODS: A tendon-repair model was created in 48 porcine lower hind limbs, which were allocated to three fixation techniques: (1) Krackow, (2) transosseous and (3) anchor fixation. Loading was performed based on a standardized phased load-to-failure protocol using a servohydraulic mechanical testing system MTS (Zwick Roell, Ulm, Germany). Rupture-zone dehiscence was measured with an external motion capture device. Factors influencing dehiscence formation was determined using a linear regression model and adjustment performed as necessary. A 3-mm gap was considered clinically relevant. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for comparison between groups. RESULTS: The elastic capacity of a tendon-repair construct influences the force necessary to induce gapping of 3 mm (F3mm) [β = 0.6, confidence interval (CI) 0.4-1.0, p < 0.001]. Furthermore, the three methods of fixation did not differ significantly in terms of maximum force to failure (n.s) or F3mm (n.s). CONCLUSION: The main finding of this study demonstrated that the higher the elastic capacity of a tendon-repair construct, the higher the force necessary to induce clinically relevant gapping. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Controlled biomechanical study.
PURPOSE: Most biomechanical investigations of tendon repairs were based on output measures from hydraulic loading machines, therefore, accounting for construct failure rather than true gapping within the rupture zone. It was hypothesized that the elastic capacity of a tendon-repair construct influences the force necessary to induce gapping. METHODS: A tendon-repair model was created in 48 porcine lower hind limbs, which were allocated to three fixation techniques: (1) Krackow, (2) transosseous and (3) anchor fixation. Loading was performed based on a standardized phased load-to-failure protocol using a servohydraulic mechanical testing system MTS (Zwick Roell, Ulm, Germany). Rupture-zone dehiscence was measured with an external motion capture device. Factors influencing dehiscence formation was determined using a linear regression model and adjustment performed as necessary. A 3-mm gap was considered clinically relevant. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for comparison between groups. RESULTS: The elastic capacity of a tendon-repair construct influences the force necessary to induce gapping of 3 mm (F3mm) [β = 0.6, confidence interval (CI) 0.4-1.0, p < 0.001]. Furthermore, the three methods of fixation did not differ significantly in terms of maximum force to failure (n.s) or F3mm (n.s). CONCLUSION: The main finding of this study demonstrated that the higher the elastic capacity of a tendon-repair construct, the higher the force necessary to induce clinically relevant gapping. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Controlled biomechanical study.
Authors: Thomas O Clanton; C Thomas Haytmanek; Brady T Williams; David M Civitarese; Travis Lee Turnbull; Matthew B Massey; Coen Abel Wijdicks; Robert F LaPrade Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Martin C Jordan; Sebastian Boelch; Hendrik Jansen; Rainer H Meffert; Stefanie Hoelscher-Doht Journal: J Biomech Date: 2016-05-25 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Carlos De la Fuente; Carlos Cruz-Montecinos; Helen L Schimidt; Hugo Henríquez; Sebastián Ruidiaz; Felipe P Carpes Journal: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) Date: 2017-10-09 Impact factor: 2.063
Authors: Vincenzo Ciriello; Suribabu Gudipati; Theodoros Tosounidis; P N Soucacos; Peter V Giannoudis Journal: Injury Date: 2012-09-07 Impact factor: 2.586
Authors: Martin C Jordan; Stefanie Hoelscher-Doht; Kai Fehske; Fabian Gilbert; Hendrik Jansen; Rainer H Meffert Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2015-12-29 Impact factor: 2.359
Authors: Michael A Boin; Matthew A Dorweiler; Christopher J McMellen; Gregory C Gould; Richard T Laughlin Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2017-01-04
Authors: Ezgi Bakirci; Karin Tschan; Rahel D May; Sufian S Ahmad; Barbara Kleer; Benjamin Gantenbein Journal: Bone Joint Res Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 5.853