Comparison of Suture Types and Techniques in Achilles Tendon Repair: An Ex Vivo Biomechanical Animal Experiment.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Fatih Dogar, Kaan Gurbuz, Duran Topak, Mustafa Abdullah Ozdemir, Burak Kuşçu, Yakup Ekinci, Sabri Batin, Hakan Yaykasli, Okkes Bilal
{"title":"Comparison of Suture Types and Techniques in Achilles Tendon Repair: An Ex Vivo Biomechanical Animal Experiment.","authors":"Fatih Dogar, Kaan Gurbuz, Duran Topak, Mustafa Abdullah Ozdemir, Burak Kuşçu, Yakup Ekinci, Sabri Batin, Hakan Yaykasli, Okkes Bilal","doi":"10.7547/21-136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The ideal suture technique and type in tendon repair remain unclear. This biomechanical study aimed to assess the biomechanical characteristics of three techniques-modified Kessler (mKE), modified Krackow (mKR), and modified tension Bunnell (mtBU)-in sheep Achilles tendon tear repair using three suture types-polypropylene, polyester, and ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE)-which are also compared.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-three Achilles tendons harvested from sheep were transversely hacked as a replacement for rupture in a standardized measure and repaired using mKE, mKR, and mtBU techniques with No. 2 polypropylene, polyester, and UHMWPE sutures. Biomechanical parameters, such as Young's modulus, ultimate strength, and strength to the 5-mm gap, were recorded for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mtBU technique with UHMWPE use resulted in increased ultimate strength, strength to 5-mm gap, Young's modulus, and quantity of specimens with low clinical failure modes compared with the other techniques with other suture materials. Furthermore, mtBU has the lowest thickness at the repair side of the tendons. This approach showed tendon failure during maximal traction testing, whereas the mKE and mKR techniques had polyethylene and polyester suture failures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The UHMWPE suture was significantly superior to the other sutures in each technique in terms of strength and durability. The mtBU technique using UHMWPE suture showed better biomechanical results, implying that this repair might be more appropriate to obtain early mobilization after tendon ruptures.</p>","PeriodicalId":17241,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7547/21-136","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The ideal suture technique and type in tendon repair remain unclear. This biomechanical study aimed to assess the biomechanical characteristics of three techniques-modified Kessler (mKE), modified Krackow (mKR), and modified tension Bunnell (mtBU)-in sheep Achilles tendon tear repair using three suture types-polypropylene, polyester, and ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE)-which are also compared.

Methods: Sixty-three Achilles tendons harvested from sheep were transversely hacked as a replacement for rupture in a standardized measure and repaired using mKE, mKR, and mtBU techniques with No. 2 polypropylene, polyester, and UHMWPE sutures. Biomechanical parameters, such as Young's modulus, ultimate strength, and strength to the 5-mm gap, were recorded for statistical analysis.

Results: The mtBU technique with UHMWPE use resulted in increased ultimate strength, strength to 5-mm gap, Young's modulus, and quantity of specimens with low clinical failure modes compared with the other techniques with other suture materials. Furthermore, mtBU has the lowest thickness at the repair side of the tendons. This approach showed tendon failure during maximal traction testing, whereas the mKE and mKR techniques had polyethylene and polyester suture failures.

Conclusions: The UHMWPE suture was significantly superior to the other sutures in each technique in terms of strength and durability. The mtBU technique using UHMWPE suture showed better biomechanical results, implying that this repair might be more appropriate to obtain early mobilization after tendon ruptures.

跟腱修复中缝合类型和技术的比较:体内生物力学动物实验
背景:肌腱修复的理想缝合技术和类型仍不明确。这项生物力学研究旨在评估改良 Kessler(mKE)、改良 Krackow(mKR)和改良张力 Bunnell(mtBU)三种技术在绵羊跟腱撕裂修复中的生物力学特性,并对聚丙烯、聚酯和超高分子量聚乙烯(UHMWPE)三种缝合线进行比较:方法:对从绵羊身上采集的 63 条跟腱进行横向切割,以标准化方法替代断裂,并使用 2 号聚丙烯、聚酯和超高分子量聚乙烯缝合线,采用 mKE、mKR 和 mtBU 技术进行修复。记录生物力学参数,如杨氏模量、极限强度和 5 毫米间隙强度,以便进行统计分析:结果:与使用其他缝合材料的其他技术相比,使用超高分子量聚乙烯的 mtBU 技术提高了极限强度、5 毫米间隙强度、杨氏模量和低临床失效模式标本的数量。此外,mtBU 在肌腱修复侧的厚度最小。这种方法在最大牵引力测试中显示肌腱失效,而 mKE 和 mKR 的聚乙烯和聚酯缝合线失效:结论:在每种缝合技术中,超高分子量聚乙烯缝合线在强度和耐久性方面都明显优于其他缝合线。使用超高分子量聚乙烯缝线的 mtBU 技术显示出更好的生物力学效果,这意味着这种修复方法可能更适合肌腱断裂后的早期活动。
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
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, the official journal of the Association, is the oldest and most frequently cited peer-reviewed journal in the profession of foot and ankle medicine. Founded in 1907 and appearing 6 times per year, it publishes research studies, case reports, literature reviews, special communications, clinical correspondence, letters to the editor, book reviews, and various other types of submissions. The Journal is included in major indexing and abstracting services for biomedical literature.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信