Pectoralis Major Repair: A Biomechanical Analysis of Modern Repair Configurations Versus Traditional Repair Configuration

Author:

Edgar Cory M.1,Singh Hardeep1,Obopilwe Elifho1,Voss Andreas2,Divenere Jessica1,Tassavor Michael1,Comer Brendan1,Sanchez George2,Mazzocca Augustus D.1,Provencher Matthew T.23

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New England Musculoskeletal Institute, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut, USA

2. Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA

3. The Steadman Clinic, Vail, Colorado, USA

Abstract

Background: Pectoralis major (PM) ruptures are increasingly common, and a variety of surgical techniques have been described. However, tested techniques have demonstrated diminished strength with inadequate restoration of the footprint and suture failure at relatively low loads. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to biomechanically compare PM transosseous suture repair (current gold standard) to modern PM repair techniques that use larger caliber sutures, suture tape, and unicortical button fixation (UBF). The null hypothesis was that there would be no mechanical difference between repair techniques and no difference in the amount of footprint restoration. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Twenty-four fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders controlled for age and bone mineral density were randomized equally to 4 groups: (1) UBF, suture tape; (2) UBF, No. 5 suture, suture tape; (3) bone trough with No. 2 suture; and (4) native PM tendon group; all groups were tested to failure. The specimens were tested under cycling loads (10 N to 125 N) with a final load-to-failure test at 1 mm/s. Failure modes were classified by location and cause of rupture based on optical markers, while tendon footprint length was measured to determine amount of footprint restoration. Results: For fixation strength, the mean peak load was significantly greater in the native tendon (1816 ± 706 N) versus UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape (794 ± 168 N), UBF/suture tape (502 ± 201 N), and bone trough (492 ± 151 N) ( P < .001 for all). UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape featured the lowest displacement superiorly (1.09 ± 0.47 mm) and inferiorly (1.14 ± 0.39 mm) with a significant difference compared with bone trough. With regard to tendon footprint reapproximation, cortical button fixation best approximated native tendon footprint length versus bone trough. Conclusion: Based on peak failure load, the UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape construct demonstrated 61% greater construct strength than a traditional bone trough technique. Moreover, displacement after cyclic loading was by far smallest in the UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape construct. Therefore, repair constructs with larger caliber suture and suture tape provide a measurable improvement in construct strength versus traditional PM repair techniques in a biomechanical model and may be advantageous for repair. Clinical Relevance: Cortical button fixation with larger caliber suture and suture tape allows for a significantly better PM repair than more traditional techniques at the time of surgery, which may ultimately result in improved clinical outcomes if implemented in surgical practice.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3