Luis Fernando Zukanovich Funchal1, Diego Costa Astur2, André Luiz Almeida Pizzolatti3, Arthur Paiva Grimaldi3, Andrew Esteban Jimenez4, Ari Digiácomo Ocampo Moré5, Carlos Rodrigo de Mello Roesler6, Moises Cohen7. 1. Biomechanical Laboratory From Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Hospital Baia Sul, Florianópolis, Brazil. 2. Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Hospital Samaritano and Instituto Astur, Av Pacaembu 1024, São Paulo, SP, 01234-000, Brazil. mcastur@yahoo.com. 3. Biomechanical Laboratory From Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil. 4. University of Connecticut, Storrs, USA. 5. Laboratório de Engenharia Biomecânica Do Hospital Universitário da UFSC, Florianópolis, Brazil. 6. Department and Chief From Biomechanical Laboratory, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil. 7. Orthoapedic Surgeon From Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
PURPOSE: (1) To evaluate the biomechanical properties of a porcine flexor digitorum superficialis tendon graft with preserved muscle fibers and (2) to compare these results with the biomechanical properties of a porcine tendon graft after removal of associated muscle. METHODS: Eighty-two porcine forelegs were dissected and the flexor digitorum superficialis muscle tendons were harvested. The study comprised of two groups: Group 1 (G1), harvested tendon with preserved muscle tissue; and Group 2 (G2), harvested contralateral tendon with removal of all muscle tissue. Tests in both groups were conducted using an electro-mechanical material testing machine (Instron, model 23-5S, Instron Corp., Canton, MA, USA) with a 500 N force transducer. Yield load, stiffness, and maximum load were evaluated and compared between groups. RESULTS: The behavior of the autografts during the tests followed the same stretching, deformation, and failure patterns as those observed in human autografts subjected to axial strain. There were no significant differences in the comparison between groups for ultimate load to failure (p = 0.105), stiffness (p = 0.097), and energy (p = 0.761). CONCLUSION: In this porcine model biomechanical study, using autograft tendon with preserved muscle showed no statistically significant differences for yield load, stiffness, or maximum load compared to autograft tendon without preserved muscle. The preservation of muscle on the autograft tendon did not compromise the mechanical properties of the autograft. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Controlled laboratory study.
PURPOSE: (1) To evaluate the biomechanical properties of a porcine flexor digitorum superficialis tendon graft with preserved muscle fibers and (2) to compare these results with the biomechanical properties of a porcine tendon graft after removal of associated muscle. METHODS: Eighty-two porcine forelegs were dissected and the flexor digitorum superficialis muscle tendons were harvested. The study comprised of two groups: Group 1 (G1), harvested tendon with preserved muscle tissue; and Group 2 (G2), harvested contralateral tendon with removal of all muscle tissue. Tests in both groups were conducted using an electro-mechanical material testing machine (Instron, model 23-5S, Instron Corp., Canton, MA, USA) with a 500 N force transducer. Yield load, stiffness, and maximum load were evaluated and compared between groups. RESULTS: The behavior of the autografts during the tests followed the same stretching, deformation, and failure patterns as those observed in human autografts subjected to axial strain. There were no significant differences in the comparison between groups for ultimate load to failure (p = 0.105), stiffness (p = 0.097), and energy (p = 0.761). CONCLUSION: In this porcine model biomechanical study, using autograft tendon with preserved muscle showed no statistically significant differences for yield load, stiffness, or maximum load compared to autograft tendon without preserved muscle. The preservation of muscle on the autograft tendon did not compromise the mechanical properties of the autograft. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Controlled laboratory study.