新型侧向腱膜成形术与 Pulvertaft 编织术的比较:体外生物力学研究。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research Pub Date : 2024-10-26 DOI:10.1186/s13018-024-05180-2
Guoshuai Liu, Gege Lv, Fei Liu
{"title":"新型侧向腱膜成形术与 Pulvertaft 编织术的比较:体外生物力学研究。","authors":"Guoshuai Liu, Gege Lv, Fei Liu","doi":"10.1186/s13018-024-05180-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to characterize the biomechanical properties of a novel side-to-side tenorrhaphy (SST), this tenorrhaphy is designed to achieve reliable strength utilizing fewer knots and greater operationalization. This is compared with a well-established tendon reconstruction technique called the Pulvertaft weave technique (PWT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty fresh porcine hindfoot flexor tendons were collected, and 10 novel SST and 10 PWT were performed in each group. The repaired tendons were tested cyclically by applying a force of 35 N using an electric tensile testing machine. Tendons were loaded until they ruptured and failed. The cyclic elongation, ultimate elongation, ultimate failure load, stiffness, and operation time were recorded and analyzed for both groups, and the failure patterns of the tendons were observed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean operation time were 1.86 in the SST group and 3.25 min for the PWT group, respectively. The ultimate failure load was 179.93 N ± 12.05 for the SST group and 113.46 N ± 7.89 for the PWT group. The ultimate elongation was 17.79 mm ± 0.51 for the SST group and 26.83 mm ± 0.64 for the PWT group. The stiffness of the SST group was 35.27 N/mm ± 0.90 in the SST group and 20.11 N/mm ± 0.84 in the PWT group. There was no statistically significant difference in cyclic elongation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The SST group performed better than the PWT group in terms of the ultimate elongation, ultimate failure load, and stiffness. It is clear that the novel SST is a reliable alternative to PWT for tendon repair. The operation time of the SST group was significantly shorter than that of the PWT group.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"19 1","pages":"693"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515262/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of a novel side-to-side tenorrhaphy with Pulvertaft weave: an in vitro biomechanical study.\",\"authors\":\"Guoshuai Liu, Gege Lv, Fei Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13018-024-05180-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to characterize the biomechanical properties of a novel side-to-side tenorrhaphy (SST), this tenorrhaphy is designed to achieve reliable strength utilizing fewer knots and greater operationalization. This is compared with a well-established tendon reconstruction technique called the Pulvertaft weave technique (PWT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty fresh porcine hindfoot flexor tendons were collected, and 10 novel SST and 10 PWT were performed in each group. The repaired tendons were tested cyclically by applying a force of 35 N using an electric tensile testing machine. Tendons were loaded until they ruptured and failed. The cyclic elongation, ultimate elongation, ultimate failure load, stiffness, and operation time were recorded and analyzed for both groups, and the failure patterns of the tendons were observed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean operation time were 1.86 in the SST group and 3.25 min for the PWT group, respectively. The ultimate failure load was 179.93 N ± 12.05 for the SST group and 113.46 N ± 7.89 for the PWT group. The ultimate elongation was 17.79 mm ± 0.51 for the SST group and 26.83 mm ± 0.64 for the PWT group. The stiffness of the SST group was 35.27 N/mm ± 0.90 in the SST group and 20.11 N/mm ± 0.84 in the PWT group. There was no statistically significant difference in cyclic elongation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The SST group performed better than the PWT group in terms of the ultimate elongation, ultimate failure load, and stiffness. It is clear that the novel SST is a reliable alternative to PWT for tendon repair. The operation time of the SST group was significantly shorter than that of the PWT group.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16629,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"693\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515262/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05180-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05180-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在描述一种新型侧向腱鞘成形术(SST)的生物力学特性,这种腱鞘成形术旨在利用更少的结节和更高的操作性获得可靠的强度。我们将其与一种成熟的肌腱重建技术--Pulvertaft 编织技术(PWT)进行了比较:方法:收集 20 条新鲜猪后足屈肌肌腱,每组进行 10 次新型 SST 和 10 次 PWT。使用电动拉伸试验机对修复后的肌腱施加 35 牛顿的力进行周期性测试。肌腱受力直至断裂和失效。记录并分析了两组肌腱的循环伸长率、极限伸长率、极限破坏载荷、刚度和操作时间,并观察了肌腱的破坏模式:SST 组和 PWT 组的平均操作时间分别为 1.86 分钟和 3.25 分钟。SST 组的极限破坏载荷为 179.93 N ± 12.05,PWT 组为 113.46 N ± 7.89。SST 组的极限伸长率为 17.79 mm ± 0.51,PWT 组为 26.83 mm ± 0.64。SST 组的刚度为 35.27 N/mm ± 0.90,PWT 组为 20.11 N/mm ± 0.84。结论:SST 组的表现优于 PWT 组:结论:就极限伸长率、极限破坏载荷和刚度而言,SST 组的表现优于 PWT 组。很明显,新型 SST 是一种可靠的肌腱修复方法,可替代 PWT。SST 组的手术时间明显短于 PWT 组。
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
Comparison of a novel side-to-side tenorrhaphy with Pulvertaft weave: an in vitro biomechanical study.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to characterize the biomechanical properties of a novel side-to-side tenorrhaphy (SST), this tenorrhaphy is designed to achieve reliable strength utilizing fewer knots and greater operationalization. This is compared with a well-established tendon reconstruction technique called the Pulvertaft weave technique (PWT).

Methods: Twenty fresh porcine hindfoot flexor tendons were collected, and 10 novel SST and 10 PWT were performed in each group. The repaired tendons were tested cyclically by applying a force of 35 N using an electric tensile testing machine. Tendons were loaded until they ruptured and failed. The cyclic elongation, ultimate elongation, ultimate failure load, stiffness, and operation time were recorded and analyzed for both groups, and the failure patterns of the tendons were observed.

Results: The mean operation time were 1.86 in the SST group and 3.25 min for the PWT group, respectively. The ultimate failure load was 179.93 N ± 12.05 for the SST group and 113.46 N ± 7.89 for the PWT group. The ultimate elongation was 17.79 mm ± 0.51 for the SST group and 26.83 mm ± 0.64 for the PWT group. The stiffness of the SST group was 35.27 N/mm ± 0.90 in the SST group and 20.11 N/mm ± 0.84 in the PWT group. There was no statistically significant difference in cyclic elongation.

Conclusion: The SST group performed better than the PWT group in terms of the ultimate elongation, ultimate failure load, and stiffness. It is clear that the novel SST is a reliable alternative to PWT for tendon repair. The operation time of the SST group was significantly shorter than that of the PWT group.

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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
494
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues. Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications. JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.
期刊最新文献
Exosomes secreted from human-derived adipose stem cells prevent progression of osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Risk factors of short-term residual low back pain after PKP for the first thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture. Correction: Oblique lateral internal fusion combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in severe lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical and radiographic outcome. Forearm bone mineral density as a predictor of adjacent vertebral refracture after percutaneous kyphoplasty in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture: a retrospective analysis. Global incidence of osteonecrosis of the femoral head after femoral neck fracture surgery in adolescents: a meta-analysis.
×
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