人体尸体半月板模型中全缝合、全内侧半月板修复装置的生物力学比较

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1177/19476035241234315
Patrick A Massey, Wayne Scalisi, Carver Montgomery, Drayton Daily, James Robinson, Giovanni F Solitro
{"title":"人体尸体半月板模型中全缝合、全内侧半月板修复装置的生物力学比较","authors":"Patrick A Massey, Wayne Scalisi, Carver Montgomery, Drayton Daily, James Robinson, Giovanni F Solitro","doi":"10.1177/19476035241234315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Newer all-suture, all-inside meniscus repair devices utilize soft suture anchors. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical performance of 4 meniscus repair devices in human cadaver menisci: the JuggerStitch (all-suture, all-inside), the FiberStitch (all-suture, all-inside), a polyether ether ketone (PEEK) all-inside, and an inside-out device.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Forty human cadaver menisci were tested after creating 20 mm longitudinal tears in the posterior meniscus. Each knee was randomized to 1 of 4 meniscus repair groups: JuggerStitch (all-suture, all-inside), FiberStitch (all-suture, all-inside), FAST-FIX 360 (PEEK-based anchor all-inside), and inside-out (with Broadband<sup>TM</sup> tape meniscus needles). For each meniscus, 2 devices were used to prepare vertical mattress repair construct. The specimens were tested by pre-conditioning 20 cycles between 5 N and 30 N and then the tear diastasis was measured, followed by distraction to failure phase after imposing a displacement at a rate of 0.5 mm/s.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten menisci were tested in each of the 4 groups. After pre-conditioning, there was no significant difference in the gap formation among groups (<i>P</i> = 0.212). The average failure load for the JuggerStitch, FiberStitch, PEEK all-inside, and inside-out was 384 N, 311 N, 207 N, and 261 N, respectively, with a significant difference between groups (<i>P</i> = 0.034). <i>Post hoc</i> analysis showed the JuggerStitch failure load was higher than the PEEK all-inside and inside-out (<i>P</i> = 0.005, and <i>P</i> = 0.045, respectively). There was no significant difference between the failure load of the JuggerStitch and FiberStitch (<i>P</i> = 0.225).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The JuggerStitch all-suture device, FiberStitch all-suture device, PEEK all-inside, and inside-out devices have similar biomechanical properties for gapping and stiffness. The JuggerStitch all-suture, all-inside device has superior failure load compared with the PEEK all-inside and inside-out repair for longitudinal meniscus tear repair.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biomechanical Comparison of All-Suture, All-Inside Meniscus Repair Devices in a Human Cadaveric Meniscus Model.\",\"authors\":\"Patrick A Massey, Wayne Scalisi, Carver Montgomery, Drayton Daily, James Robinson, Giovanni F Solitro\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19476035241234315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Newer all-suture, all-inside meniscus repair devices utilize soft suture anchors. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical performance of 4 meniscus repair devices in human cadaver menisci: the JuggerStitch (all-suture, all-inside), the FiberStitch (all-suture, all-inside), a polyether ether ketone (PEEK) all-inside, and an inside-out device.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Forty human cadaver menisci were tested after creating 20 mm longitudinal tears in the posterior meniscus. Each knee was randomized to 1 of 4 meniscus repair groups: JuggerStitch (all-suture, all-inside), FiberStitch (all-suture, all-inside), FAST-FIX 360 (PEEK-based anchor all-inside), and inside-out (with Broadband<sup>TM</sup> tape meniscus needles). For each meniscus, 2 devices were used to prepare vertical mattress repair construct. The specimens were tested by pre-conditioning 20 cycles between 5 N and 30 N and then the tear diastasis was measured, followed by distraction to failure phase after imposing a displacement at a rate of 0.5 mm/s.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten menisci were tested in each of the 4 groups. After pre-conditioning, there was no significant difference in the gap formation among groups (<i>P</i> = 0.212). The average failure load for the JuggerStitch, FiberStitch, PEEK all-inside, and inside-out was 384 N, 311 N, 207 N, and 261 N, respectively, with a significant difference between groups (<i>P</i> = 0.034). <i>Post hoc</i> analysis showed the JuggerStitch failure load was higher than the PEEK all-inside and inside-out (<i>P</i> = 0.005, and <i>P</i> = 0.045, respectively). There was no significant difference between the failure load of the JuggerStitch and FiberStitch (<i>P</i> = 0.225).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The JuggerStitch all-suture device, FiberStitch all-suture device, PEEK all-inside, and inside-out devices have similar biomechanical properties for gapping and stiffness. The JuggerStitch all-suture, all-inside device has superior failure load compared with the PEEK all-inside and inside-out repair for longitudinal meniscus tear repair.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19476035241234315\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19476035241234315","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:较新的全缝合、全内侧半月板修复装置使用软缝合锚。本研究的目的是比较 4 种半月板修复装置在人体尸体半月板上的生物力学性能:JuggerStitch(全缝合、全内侧)、FiberStitch(全缝合、全内侧)、聚醚醚酮(PEEK)全内侧和内侧外装置:设计:在后半月板造成 20 毫米纵向撕裂后,对 40 个人体尸体半月板进行了测试。每个膝关节被随机分为 4 个半月板修复组中的一组:JuggerStitch(全缝合、全内侧)、FiberStitch(全缝合、全内侧)、FAST-FIX 360(基于 PEEK 的全内侧锚)和内侧外(使用 BroadbandTM 带状半月板针)。对于每个半月板,使用 2 种设备制备垂直床垫修复结构。试样在 5 牛顿和 30 牛顿之间进行 20 个循环的预处理,然后测量撕裂舒张度,在以 0.5 毫米/秒的速度施加位移后,再进行牵张至破坏阶段的测试:4 组各测试了 10 个半月板。预处理后,各组间的间隙形成无显著差异(P = 0.212)。JuggerStitch、FiberStitch、PEEK全内侧和内侧外的平均失败载荷分别为384牛顿、311牛顿、207牛顿和261牛顿,组间差异显著(P = 0.034)。事后分析表明,JuggerStitch 的失效载荷高于 PEEK 全内侧和全外侧(P = 0.005 和 P = 0.045)。JuggerStitch 和 FiberStitch 的失效载荷没有明显差异(P = 0.225):结论:JuggerStitch全缝合器、FiberStitch全缝合器、PEEK全内缝合器和内外侧缝合器在间隙和刚度方面具有相似的生物力学特性。在纵向半月板撕裂修复方面,JuggerStitch全缝合、全内侧装置与PEEK全内侧和内外侧修复相比,具有更高的失效负荷。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Biomechanical Comparison of All-Suture, All-Inside Meniscus Repair Devices in a Human Cadaveric Meniscus Model.

Objective: Newer all-suture, all-inside meniscus repair devices utilize soft suture anchors. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical performance of 4 meniscus repair devices in human cadaver menisci: the JuggerStitch (all-suture, all-inside), the FiberStitch (all-suture, all-inside), a polyether ether ketone (PEEK) all-inside, and an inside-out device.

Design: Forty human cadaver menisci were tested after creating 20 mm longitudinal tears in the posterior meniscus. Each knee was randomized to 1 of 4 meniscus repair groups: JuggerStitch (all-suture, all-inside), FiberStitch (all-suture, all-inside), FAST-FIX 360 (PEEK-based anchor all-inside), and inside-out (with BroadbandTM tape meniscus needles). For each meniscus, 2 devices were used to prepare vertical mattress repair construct. The specimens were tested by pre-conditioning 20 cycles between 5 N and 30 N and then the tear diastasis was measured, followed by distraction to failure phase after imposing a displacement at a rate of 0.5 mm/s.

Results: Ten menisci were tested in each of the 4 groups. After pre-conditioning, there was no significant difference in the gap formation among groups (P = 0.212). The average failure load for the JuggerStitch, FiberStitch, PEEK all-inside, and inside-out was 384 N, 311 N, 207 N, and 261 N, respectively, with a significant difference between groups (P = 0.034). Post hoc analysis showed the JuggerStitch failure load was higher than the PEEK all-inside and inside-out (P = 0.005, and P = 0.045, respectively). There was no significant difference between the failure load of the JuggerStitch and FiberStitch (P = 0.225).

Conclusion: The JuggerStitch all-suture device, FiberStitch all-suture device, PEEK all-inside, and inside-out devices have similar biomechanical properties for gapping and stiffness. The JuggerStitch all-suture, all-inside device has superior failure load compared with the PEEK all-inside and inside-out repair for longitudinal meniscus tear repair.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
Prevalence and associated factors for poor mental health among young migrants in Sweden: a cross-sectional study. The effectiveness of rural community health workers in improving health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Adaptation and validation of the Children's Surgical Assessment Tool for Rwandan district hospitals. Electronic health record and primary care physician self-reported quality of care: a multilevel study in China. Recruiting hard-to-reach populations via respondent driven sampling for mobile phone surveys in Colombia: a qualitative study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1