Biomechanical Comparison of 1- and 2-Tunnel Suture Suspensionplasty Constructs for Basilar Thumb Arthritis.

IF 1.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
HAND Pub Date : 2025-07-11 DOI:10.1177/15589447251350175
Daniel J Lorenzana, Bijan Abar, Eliseo V DiPrinzio, Elijah Vail, Jessica M Welch, Christopher S Klifto, David S Ruch, Marc J Richard, Ken Gall, Tyler S Pidgeon
{"title":"Biomechanical Comparison of 1- and 2-Tunnel Suture Suspensionplasty Constructs for Basilar Thumb Arthritis.","authors":"Daniel J Lorenzana, Bijan Abar, Eliseo V DiPrinzio, Elijah Vail, Jessica M Welch, Christopher S Klifto, David S Ruch, Marc J Richard, Ken Gall, Tyler S Pidgeon","doi":"10.1177/15589447251350175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Trapeziectomy with suture button suspensionplasty (SBS) is a common treatment for thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of bone tunnel configuration and suture count on the construct stability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twelve matched specimens underwent trapeziectomy and randomization to either a 2-strand 1-tunnel (single SBS) or divergent 4-strand 2-tunnel suture button (crossed dual SBS) construct. Mechanical stiffness was measured using material testing machine with a semiconstrained axial load over 5-mm displacement. Trapezial space was measured under no load and in a light and heavy physiologic pinch grip models. Subsequently, specimens were randomized to undergo single SBS or divergent 2-strand 2-tunnel suture (crossed suture) constructs, and loaded pinch testing was performed. Primary outcomes were analyzed using matched-pair <i>t</i>-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The crossed dual SBS construct showed significantly higher stiffness compared to the single SBS construct in elastic deformation (19.9 vs 15.5 N/mm, <i>P</i> = .010) and maintained trapezial height better in both light (82% vs 71%, <i>P</i> = .021) and heavy (73% vs 46%, p = .004) pinch grips. The crossed suture technique also preserved trapezial height better than the single SBS construct in light (79% vs 64%, <i>P</i> = 0.021) and heavy (60% vs 44%, <i>P</i> = 0.039) pinch grips.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the immediate postoperative period, a crossed dual SBS construct was stiffer to axial load and more stable in pinch grip compared to a single SBS construct. The novel crossed suture construct better preserved trapezial height then the singe SBS, suggesting that the crossed configuration may be more relevant than suture count in postoperative stability.</p>","PeriodicalId":12902,"journal":{"name":"HAND","volume":" ","pages":"15589447251350175"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12254138/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HAND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15589447251350175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Trapeziectomy with suture button suspensionplasty (SBS) is a common treatment for thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of bone tunnel configuration and suture count on the construct stability.

Methods: Twelve matched specimens underwent trapeziectomy and randomization to either a 2-strand 1-tunnel (single SBS) or divergent 4-strand 2-tunnel suture button (crossed dual SBS) construct. Mechanical stiffness was measured using material testing machine with a semiconstrained axial load over 5-mm displacement. Trapezial space was measured under no load and in a light and heavy physiologic pinch grip models. Subsequently, specimens were randomized to undergo single SBS or divergent 2-strand 2-tunnel suture (crossed suture) constructs, and loaded pinch testing was performed. Primary outcomes were analyzed using matched-pair t-tests.

Results: The crossed dual SBS construct showed significantly higher stiffness compared to the single SBS construct in elastic deformation (19.9 vs 15.5 N/mm, P = .010) and maintained trapezial height better in both light (82% vs 71%, P = .021) and heavy (73% vs 46%, p = .004) pinch grips. The crossed suture technique also preserved trapezial height better than the single SBS construct in light (79% vs 64%, P = 0.021) and heavy (60% vs 44%, P = 0.039) pinch grips.

Conclusions: In the immediate postoperative period, a crossed dual SBS construct was stiffer to axial load and more stable in pinch grip compared to a single SBS construct. The novel crossed suture construct better preserved trapezial height then the singe SBS, suggesting that the crossed configuration may be more relevant than suture count in postoperative stability.

1隧道和2隧道缝合悬吊成形术治疗拇指基底关节炎的生物力学比较。
背景:椎体切除加缝合扣悬吊成形术(SBS)是拇指腕掌骨关节炎(CMC)的常用治疗方法。本研究旨在评估骨隧道形态和缝线数量对构建体稳定性的影响。方法:12例匹配的标本行梯形切除术,随机分为2股1隧道缝合扣(单SBS)和发散型4股2隧道缝合扣(交叉双SBS)。机械刚度采用半应变轴向载荷大于5mm位移的材料试验机进行测量。在无负荷和轻、重生理捏握模型下测量梯形空间。随后,将标本随机分为单侧SBS或发散型2-股2-隧道缝合(交叉缝合),并进行负载夹紧试验。主要结局采用配对t检验进行分析。结果:交叉双SBS结构在弹性变形方面的刚度明显高于单SBS结构(19.9 N/mm vs 15.5 N/mm, P = 0.010),在轻(82% vs 71%, P = 0.021)和重(73% vs 46%, P = 0.004)捏握时均能更好地保持斜向高度。在轻(79% vs 64%, P = 0.021)和重(60% vs 44%, P = 0.039)捏握情况下,交叉缝合技术比单一SBS结构更能保持斜位高度。结论:在术后即刻,交叉双SBS结构比单一SBS结构对轴向载荷更硬,握力更稳定。新型交叉缝合结构比单一SBS更好地保存了斜位高度,表明交叉结构可能比缝合数量与术后稳定性更相关。
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
HAND
HAND Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
209
期刊介绍: HAND is the official journal of the American Association for Hand Surgery and is a peer-reviewed journal featuring articles written by clinicians worldwide presenting current research and clinical work in the field of hand surgery. It features articles related to all aspects of hand and upper extremity surgery and the post operative care and rehabilitation of the hand.
×
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