TY - JOUR
T1 - Reattachment of the flexor and extensor tendons at the epicondyle in elbow instability
T2 - A biomechanical comparison of techniques
AU - Lenich, Andreas
AU - Pfeifer, Christian
AU - Proier, Philipp
AU - Fleer, Roman
AU - Wijdicks, Coen
AU - Roth, Martina
AU - Martetschläger, Frank
AU - Pogorzelski, Jonas
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Author(s).
PY - 2018/12/3
Y1 - 2018/12/3
N2 - Background: Elbow dislocation represents a common injury, especially in the younger population. If treated surgically, the reattached tendons require a high amount of primary stability to allow for an early rehabilitation to avoid postoperative stiffness. The purpose of this study was to assess the biomechanical properties of a single and a double row technique for reattachment of the common extensor and common flexor muscles origin. We hypothesized that the double row technique would provide greater stability in terms of pullout forces than the single row technique. Methods: Twelve cadaveric specimens were randomized into two groups of fixation methods for the common extensor tendon or the common flexor tendon at the elbow (1): a single row technique using two knotted 3.0 mm suture anchors, and (2) a double row technique using an additional knotless 3.5 mm anchor. The repairs were cyclically loaded over 500 cycles at 1 Hz from 10 N to a maximum of 100 N (extensors) or 150 N (flexors), and then pulled to failure. Stiffness and maximum load at failure and mode of failure were recorded and calculated. Results: No significant differences in stiffness were observed between the two techniques for both the extensor and flexor reattachment (P = 0.701 and P = 0.306, respectively). The mean maximum load at failure indicated that the double row construct was significantly stronger than the single row construct. This was found to be true for both the extensor and flexor reattachment (213.6; SD 78.7 N versus 384.1; SD 105.6 N, P = 0.010 and 203.7; SD 65.8 N versus 318.0; SD 64.6 N, P = 0.013, respectively). Conclusions: The double row technique provides significant greater stability to the reattached common flexor or extensor origin to the medial or lateral epicondyle. Thus, it should be considered in the development of improved repair techniques for stabilizers of the elbow. Study design: Controlled laboratory study.
AB - Background: Elbow dislocation represents a common injury, especially in the younger population. If treated surgically, the reattached tendons require a high amount of primary stability to allow for an early rehabilitation to avoid postoperative stiffness. The purpose of this study was to assess the biomechanical properties of a single and a double row technique for reattachment of the common extensor and common flexor muscles origin. We hypothesized that the double row technique would provide greater stability in terms of pullout forces than the single row technique. Methods: Twelve cadaveric specimens were randomized into two groups of fixation methods for the common extensor tendon or the common flexor tendon at the elbow (1): a single row technique using two knotted 3.0 mm suture anchors, and (2) a double row technique using an additional knotless 3.5 mm anchor. The repairs were cyclically loaded over 500 cycles at 1 Hz from 10 N to a maximum of 100 N (extensors) or 150 N (flexors), and then pulled to failure. Stiffness and maximum load at failure and mode of failure were recorded and calculated. Results: No significant differences in stiffness were observed between the two techniques for both the extensor and flexor reattachment (P = 0.701 and P = 0.306, respectively). The mean maximum load at failure indicated that the double row construct was significantly stronger than the single row construct. This was found to be true for both the extensor and flexor reattachment (213.6; SD 78.7 N versus 384.1; SD 105.6 N, P = 0.010 and 203.7; SD 65.8 N versus 318.0; SD 64.6 N, P = 0.013, respectively). Conclusions: The double row technique provides significant greater stability to the reattached common flexor or extensor origin to the medial or lateral epicondyle. Thus, it should be considered in the development of improved repair techniques for stabilizers of the elbow. Study design: Controlled laboratory study.
KW - Common extensor muscle origin
KW - Common flexor muscle origin
KW - Dislocation
KW - Elbow
KW - Reattachment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057595995&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12891-018-2341-y
DO - 10.1186/s12891-018-2341-y
M3 - Article
C2 - 30509244
AN - SCOPUS:85057595995
SN - 1471-2474
VL - 19
JO - BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
JF - BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
IS - 1
M1 - 432
ER -