Biomechanical evaluation of the H-Loop technique and single-row knotted technique for repairing upper third subscapularis tendon injuries.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Yi-Tao Yang, Yun Su, Zhuo Wang, Jin-Ming Zhang, Yi Long, Chen-Yang Meng, Xing-Hao Deng, Jing-Yi Hou, Rui Yang
{"title":"Biomechanical evaluation of the H-Loop technique and single-row knotted technique for repairing upper third subscapularis tendon injuries.","authors":"Yi-Tao Yang, Yun Su, Zhuo Wang, Jin-Ming Zhang, Yi Long, Chen-Yang Meng, Xing-Hao Deng, Jing-Yi Hou, Rui Yang","doi":"10.1186/s12891-025-08743-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We evaluated the biomechanical performance of the new knotless H-Loop technique in repairing the upper third subscapularis (SSC) tendon tear, and compared these results with the single-row knotted technique. A total of 69 subscapularis tendons from sheep were collected, with 10 specimens randomly selected for comprehensive biomechanical testing after either complete tendon or upper third tear. An additional five specimens were dedicated to measuring the size and extent of the footprint area of the SSC tendon. The remaining 44 specimens were randomly and evenly divided into two groups: H-Loop(n = 11) and single-row knotted groups(n = 11). Contact area and pressure, ultimate tensile strength, stiffness, and elongation were assessed. Compared to the single-row knotted technique, the footprint contact pressure repaired by H-Loop technique was significantly larger (mean difference = 5.09 N, p = 0.004), but the footprint contact area (64.09 ± 10.37mm<sup>2</sup>) was similar to that of single-row knotted technique (58.27 ± 9.84mm<sup>2</sup>). The ultimate tensile strength and stiffness of the H-Loop technique were significantly greater than those of the single-row knotted technique (mean difference = 16.58 N, p = 0.003; mean difference = 0.82 N/mm, p = 0.002), while the peak-to-peak elongation was significantly lower (mean difference = 0.51 mm, p = 0.030). The primary failure mode for single-row knotted techniques is suture cut-through at the suture-tendon interface, while for the H-Loop technique, the main failure mode is related to the eyelet. The H-Loop technique provides higher tendon-bone contact pressure and mechanical strength with a smaller gap between the tendon and bone compared to the single-row knotted technique.</p>","PeriodicalId":9189,"journal":{"name":"BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders","volume":"26 1","pages":"558"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12139145/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-025-08743-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We evaluated the biomechanical performance of the new knotless H-Loop technique in repairing the upper third subscapularis (SSC) tendon tear, and compared these results with the single-row knotted technique. A total of 69 subscapularis tendons from sheep were collected, with 10 specimens randomly selected for comprehensive biomechanical testing after either complete tendon or upper third tear. An additional five specimens were dedicated to measuring the size and extent of the footprint area of the SSC tendon. The remaining 44 specimens were randomly and evenly divided into two groups: H-Loop(n = 11) and single-row knotted groups(n = 11). Contact area and pressure, ultimate tensile strength, stiffness, and elongation were assessed. Compared to the single-row knotted technique, the footprint contact pressure repaired by H-Loop technique was significantly larger (mean difference = 5.09 N, p = 0.004), but the footprint contact area (64.09 ± 10.37mm2) was similar to that of single-row knotted technique (58.27 ± 9.84mm2). The ultimate tensile strength and stiffness of the H-Loop technique were significantly greater than those of the single-row knotted technique (mean difference = 16.58 N, p = 0.003; mean difference = 0.82 N/mm, p = 0.002), while the peak-to-peak elongation was significantly lower (mean difference = 0.51 mm, p = 0.030). The primary failure mode for single-row knotted techniques is suture cut-through at the suture-tendon interface, while for the H-Loop technique, the main failure mode is related to the eyelet. The H-Loop technique provides higher tendon-bone contact pressure and mechanical strength with a smaller gap between the tendon and bone compared to the single-row knotted technique.

H-Loop技术和单排打结技术修复上三肩胛下肌腱损伤的生物力学评价。
我们评估了新型无结H-Loop技术修复肩胛下肌(SSC)肌腱撕裂的生物力学性能,并将这些结果与单排结技术进行了比较。采集绵羊肩胛下肌腱69根,随机抽取10根进行肌腱完全撕裂或上三分之一撕裂后的综合生物力学试验。另外五个标本用于测量SSC肌腱足迹面积的大小和范围。其余44个标本随机均匀分为两组:H-Loop组(n = 11)和单排结组(n = 11)。接触面积和压力,极限抗拉强度,刚度和伸长率进行了评估。与单排打结技术相比,H-Loop技术修复的足迹接触压力显著增大(平均差值为5.09 N, p = 0.004),但足迹接触面积(64.09±10.37mm2)与单排打结技术(58.27±9.84mm2)相似。H-Loop技术的极限抗拉强度和刚度显著大于单排打结技术(平均差值= 16.58 N, p = 0.003;平均差值为0.82 N/mm, p = 0.002),峰间伸长率显著降低(平均差值为0.51 mm, p = 0.030)。单排打结技术的主要失效模式是缝线与肌腱界面处的缝线断裂,而H-Loop技术的主要失效模式与孔眼有关。与单排打结技术相比,H-Loop技术提供了更高的肌腱-骨接触压力和机械强度,并且肌腱和骨之间的间隙更小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1017
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of musculoskeletal disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology. The scope of the Journal covers research into rheumatic diseases where the primary focus relates specifically to a component(s) of the musculoskeletal system.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信