Biomechanical comparison of innovative suture techniques for repair of Achilles tendon rupture in a porcine flexor tendon model

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Lasse Weigand, Benjamin Liebrand, Sophia Scheible, Rainer Meffert, Stefanie Hoelscher-Doht
{"title":"Biomechanical comparison of innovative suture techniques for repair of Achilles tendon rupture in a porcine flexor tendon model","authors":"Lasse Weigand,&nbsp;Benjamin Liebrand,&nbsp;Sophia Scheible,&nbsp;Rainer Meffert,&nbsp;Stefanie Hoelscher-Doht","doi":"10.1007/s00402-026-06508-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p> In recent years, evidence-based progressive rehabilitation protocols following the surgical treatment of Achilles tendon rupture have been shown to be safe and appear superior to more restrictive treatment regimens. These protocols mainly rely on early mobilization and weight bearing. To enable this during postoperative rehabilitation, a biomechanically stable surgical treatment must be ensured. Different solutions for suturing ruptured Achilles tendons are currently favored by orthopedic surgeons and have been investigated in the past, including promising further developments of traditional approaches such as the combination of pretension and the Bunnell technique, as well as minimally invasive or percutaneous techniques using systems like the Arthrex PARS. However, the best solution in this regard remains unclear.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>We analyzed the biomechanical stability of four different suture techniques using porcine deep flexor tendons as a biomechanical model for human Achilles tendons. The tendons were harvested, prepared and sutured according to their respective group (A: Bunnell, B: Bunnell + pretension, C: PARS-to-PARS, D: PARS + anchor). The four groups (<i>n</i> = 12) underwent progressive, cyclic, uniaxial tensile loading in the biomechanical testing machine (ZwickRoell Z020).</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Group D (PARS + anchor) showed the highest maximum force at ultimate failure, resisting statistically significant higher loads compared to all the other groups. Pretension led to a non-significant increase in maximum force in the Bunnell groups. This was the case for the force necessary to create a 5 mm gap as well, while the force necessary to create the initial gap was equal in the PARS-to-PARS and pretensioned Bunnell group, both proving superior to the Bunnell group without pretension. Group D consistently resisted statistically significant higher forces in comparison to the PARS-to-PARS group for the initial gap, the 5 mm gap and until failure. This was generally valid for the number of cycles necessary to reach the initial gap, the 5 mm gap and the point of failure, as well.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Considering the superiority over both Bunnell techniques during the biomechanical testing in this experimental model despite its limitations in transferability, using the PARS-to-PARS technique in suturing ruptured Achilles tendons seems to be a valid alternative from a biomechanical point of view. We hypothesize that its higher resistance to tension forces found in this study could provide the potential to facilitate more progressive postoperative treatment protocols reflected by earlier weight bearing, which could enable improved rehabilitation outcomes and should be investigated in future studies. While forces acting on the human Achilles tendon during walking in an ankle foot orthosis (AFO) with a lifted heel are estimated at approximately 200 N, our results indicate resistance within a similar force range for the PARS technique. We hypothesize that this technique may contribute to a reduced risk of rerupture, which should be investigated further. Using suture anchors increases the stress resistance of this system further, which makes it a viable alternative not only in distal ruptures. When an open approach is desired, applying pretension can improve the stress resistance of a traditional approach like the Bunnell method, so surgeons should consider this adaptation in such cases.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8326,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","volume":"146 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00402-026-06508-9.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00402-026-06508-9","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

Introduction

In recent years, evidence-based progressive rehabilitation protocols following the surgical treatment of Achilles tendon rupture have been shown to be safe and appear superior to more restrictive treatment regimens. These protocols mainly rely on early mobilization and weight bearing. To enable this during postoperative rehabilitation, a biomechanically stable surgical treatment must be ensured. Different solutions for suturing ruptured Achilles tendons are currently favored by orthopedic surgeons and have been investigated in the past, including promising further developments of traditional approaches such as the combination of pretension and the Bunnell technique, as well as minimally invasive or percutaneous techniques using systems like the Arthrex PARS. However, the best solution in this regard remains unclear.

Methods

We analyzed the biomechanical stability of four different suture techniques using porcine deep flexor tendons as a biomechanical model for human Achilles tendons. The tendons were harvested, prepared and sutured according to their respective group (A: Bunnell, B: Bunnell + pretension, C: PARS-to-PARS, D: PARS + anchor). The four groups (n = 12) underwent progressive, cyclic, uniaxial tensile loading in the biomechanical testing machine (ZwickRoell Z020).

Results

Group D (PARS + anchor) showed the highest maximum force at ultimate failure, resisting statistically significant higher loads compared to all the other groups. Pretension led to a non-significant increase in maximum force in the Bunnell groups. This was the case for the force necessary to create a 5 mm gap as well, while the force necessary to create the initial gap was equal in the PARS-to-PARS and pretensioned Bunnell group, both proving superior to the Bunnell group without pretension. Group D consistently resisted statistically significant higher forces in comparison to the PARS-to-PARS group for the initial gap, the 5 mm gap and until failure. This was generally valid for the number of cycles necessary to reach the initial gap, the 5 mm gap and the point of failure, as well.

Conclusions

Considering the superiority over both Bunnell techniques during the biomechanical testing in this experimental model despite its limitations in transferability, using the PARS-to-PARS technique in suturing ruptured Achilles tendons seems to be a valid alternative from a biomechanical point of view. We hypothesize that its higher resistance to tension forces found in this study could provide the potential to facilitate more progressive postoperative treatment protocols reflected by earlier weight bearing, which could enable improved rehabilitation outcomes and should be investigated in future studies. While forces acting on the human Achilles tendon during walking in an ankle foot orthosis (AFO) with a lifted heel are estimated at approximately 200 N, our results indicate resistance within a similar force range for the PARS technique. We hypothesize that this technique may contribute to a reduced risk of rerupture, which should be investigated further. Using suture anchors increases the stress resistance of this system further, which makes it a viable alternative not only in distal ruptures. When an open approach is desired, applying pretension can improve the stress resistance of a traditional approach like the Bunnell method, so surgeons should consider this adaptation in such cases.

创新缝合技术修复猪屈肌腱模型跟腱断裂的生物力学比较
近年来,基于证据的跟腱断裂手术治疗后的渐进式康复方案已被证明是安全的,并且似乎优于更严格的治疗方案。这些方案主要依赖于早期动员和负重。为了在术后康复期间实现这一点,必须确保生物力学稳定的手术治疗。缝合断裂跟腱的不同解决方案目前受到骨科医生的青睐,并在过去进行了研究,包括传统方法的有前途的进一步发展,如预张力和Bunnell技术的结合,以及使用Arthrex PARS系统的微创或经皮技术。然而,这方面的最佳解决方案仍不清楚。方法以猪深屈肌腱为人体跟腱的生物力学模型,分析四种不同缝合方法的生物力学稳定性。按各组(A: Bunnell, B: Bunnell +预紧力,C: PARS- PARS, D: PARS +锚)收集、制备并缝合肌腱。四组(n = 12)在生物力学试验机(ZwickRoell Z020)中进行渐进式、循环式、单轴拉伸加载。结果与其他各组相比,D组(PARS + anchor)在极限破坏时的最大受力最高,抵抗的荷载也有统计学意义。预张力导致邦内尔组的最大力量没有显著增加。对于产生5mm间隙所需的力也是如此,而在pars - pars和预紧Bunnell组中,产生初始间隙所需的力是相等的,两者都证明优于没有预紧的Bunnell组。与PARS-to-PARS组相比,D组在初始间隙、5mm间隙和失败之前一直承受着统计学上显著更高的力。对于达到初始间隙、5毫米间隙和故障点所需的循环次数,这通常是有效的。结论考虑到两种Bunnell技术在该实验模型的生物力学测试中的优越性,尽管其可移植性存在局限性,从生物力学的角度来看,使用PARS-to-PARS技术缝合断裂的跟腱似乎是一种有效的选择。我们假设,本研究中发现的其对拉力的抵抗力更高,可能为早期负重所反映的更渐进的术后治疗方案提供了潜力,这可能会改善康复效果,应该在未来的研究中进行研究。虽然在踝关节足矫形器(AFO)中行走时作用在跟腱上的力估计约为200 N,但我们的研究结果表明,PARS技术的阻力在类似的力范围内。我们推测这种技术可能有助于降低再破裂的风险,这一点有待进一步研究。使用缝合锚钉进一步增加了该系统的抗应力性,这使得它不仅在远端骨折中是可行的选择。当需要开放入路时,应用预紧力可以提高传统入路(如Bunnell方法)的抗应力性,因此在这种情况下,外科医生应该考虑这种调整。
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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
424
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is a rich source of instruction and information for physicians in clinical practice and research in the extensive field of orthopaedics and traumatology. The journal publishes papers that deal with diseases and injuries of the musculoskeletal system from all fields and aspects of medicine. The journal is particularly interested in papers that satisfy the information needs of orthopaedic clinicians and practitioners. The journal places special emphasis on clinical relevance. "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is the official journal of the German Speaking Arthroscopy Association (AGA).
×
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
小红书