使用张力装置是否能提高盂骨结构缝合固定的稳定性?生物力学分析。

IF 1.5 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Kyle D Paul, Allen A Yazdi, David M Sylvester, Marshall D Williams, Mathew D Hargreaves, Amit M Momaya, Eugene W Brabston, Brent A Ponce
{"title":"使用张力装置是否能提高盂骨结构缝合固定的稳定性?生物力学分析。","authors":"Kyle D Paul, Allen A Yazdi, David M Sylvester, Marshall D Williams, Mathew D Hargreaves, Amit M Momaya, Eugene W Brabston, Brent A Ponce","doi":"10.1177/17585732241276428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study is to quantify the difference in biomechanical stability of suture button (SB) and suture tape cerclage (STC) constructs with hand tensioning versus device tensioning of anterior glenoid augmentation bone grafts in an anterior glenoid bone loss model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Artificial bone blocks with a density of 15 lb/ft<sup>3</sup> (240.3 kg/m<sup>3</sup>) were used as models for glenoid fixation with bone graft. The biomechanical stability of SB and STC tensioned by hand was compared to those tensioned by a device. Average displacement (mm) following application of various forces (50, 100, 150, and 200 N) during a 7-phase, 100-cycle, stairstep cyclic loading protocol was recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both SB and STC fixation displayed significantly lower construct displacement at all tested forces when tensioned with a device versus hand (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Device-tensioned SB and STC were comparable in construct stability at forces below 100N. However, at forces above 100 N, device-tensioned SB exhibited significantly less displacement than device-tensioned STC.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Using a tensioning device for SB or STC fixation of a coracoid graft model results in less displacement and improved stability compared to hand tensioning. Biomechanically, a tensioning device enhances the stability of suture fixation in glenoid bone graft constructs.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732241276428"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11568518/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the use of a tensioning device improve stability for suture fixation of glenoid bone constructs? A biomechanical analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Kyle D Paul, Allen A Yazdi, David M Sylvester, Marshall D Williams, Mathew D Hargreaves, Amit M Momaya, Eugene W Brabston, Brent A Ponce\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17585732241276428\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study is to quantify the difference in biomechanical stability of suture button (SB) and suture tape cerclage (STC) constructs with hand tensioning versus device tensioning of anterior glenoid augmentation bone grafts in an anterior glenoid bone loss model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Artificial bone blocks with a density of 15 lb/ft<sup>3</sup> (240.3 kg/m<sup>3</sup>) were used as models for glenoid fixation with bone graft. The biomechanical stability of SB and STC tensioned by hand was compared to those tensioned by a device. Average displacement (mm) following application of various forces (50, 100, 150, and 200 N) during a 7-phase, 100-cycle, stairstep cyclic loading protocol was recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both SB and STC fixation displayed significantly lower construct displacement at all tested forces when tensioned with a device versus hand (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Device-tensioned SB and STC were comparable in construct stability at forces below 100N. However, at forces above 100 N, device-tensioned SB exhibited significantly less displacement than device-tensioned STC.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Using a tensioning device for SB or STC fixation of a coracoid graft model results in less displacement and improved stability compared to hand tensioning. Biomechanically, a tensioning device enhances the stability of suture fixation in glenoid bone graft constructs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36705,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Shoulder and Elbow\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17585732241276428\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11568518/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Shoulder and Elbow\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17585732241276428\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shoulder and Elbow","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17585732241276428","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在量化缝合扣(SB)和缝合带cerclage(STC)结构在前盂骨缺失模型中手工张力与设备张力对前盂增量植骨的生物力学稳定性的差异:方法:使用密度为 15 磅/立方英尺(240.3 千克/立方米)的人工骨块作为植骨盂固定模型。将人工拉伸的 SB 和 STC 的生物力学稳定性与设备拉伸的 SB 和 STC 的生物力学稳定性进行比较。在一个 7 个阶段、100 个周期的步进循环加载方案中,记录了施加各种力(50、100、150 和 200 N)后的平均位移(毫米):结果:SB 和 STC 固定装置在所有测试力作用下的结构位移都明显低于手动张紧装置(p 讨论):与手动张力相比,使用张力装置固定 SB 或 STC 冠状移植物模型可减少位移并提高稳定性。从生物力学角度看,张力装置可增强盂骨移植结构缝合固定的稳定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does the use of a tensioning device improve stability for suture fixation of glenoid bone constructs? A biomechanical analysis.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to quantify the difference in biomechanical stability of suture button (SB) and suture tape cerclage (STC) constructs with hand tensioning versus device tensioning of anterior glenoid augmentation bone grafts in an anterior glenoid bone loss model.

Methods: Artificial bone blocks with a density of 15 lb/ft3 (240.3 kg/m3) were used as models for glenoid fixation with bone graft. The biomechanical stability of SB and STC tensioned by hand was compared to those tensioned by a device. Average displacement (mm) following application of various forces (50, 100, 150, and 200 N) during a 7-phase, 100-cycle, stairstep cyclic loading protocol was recorded.

Results: Both SB and STC fixation displayed significantly lower construct displacement at all tested forces when tensioned with a device versus hand (p < 0.001). Device-tensioned SB and STC were comparable in construct stability at forces below 100N. However, at forces above 100 N, device-tensioned SB exhibited significantly less displacement than device-tensioned STC.

Discussion: Using a tensioning device for SB or STC fixation of a coracoid graft model results in less displacement and improved stability compared to hand tensioning. Biomechanically, a tensioning device enhances the stability of suture fixation in glenoid bone graft constructs.

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
Shoulder and Elbow
Shoulder and Elbow Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
×
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