Biomechanical Study of Two Peripheral Suture Methods on Repaired Tendons

• Authors: Shixin Wang , Zhenling Qiu
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Flexor digitorum tendon injuries are challenging
conditions to manage to ensure optimal patient outcomes.
While several surgical approaches with high success rates
have been developed, there remains no gold standard for
suture technique for the repair of flexor tendon injuries.
In this study, we compared two distinct peripheral suture
methods on the strength of repaired tendons. Pig flexor
digitorum profundus tendons were used in biomechanical
studies and the biomechanical influence on tendon repair
of continuous running peripheral suture (CRPS) and
continuous locking peripheral suture (CLPS), were compared,
using stitch length ranging from 1mm to 5mm. In
CRPS, the 1mm stitch length group displayed the highest
maximum load and breaking power, which was 1.57 fold
higher than the 2mm stitch length group. Pairwise comparison
revealed that the 1 and 2mm groups were statistically
different from the 3, 4, and 5mm stitch length
groups while comparison among the latter groups was not
statistically significant. For CLPS, the 1mm group exhibited
consistently the highest maximum load strength and
breaking power, which was twice the strength displayed
by the 2mm group. Pairwise comparisons between groups
showed statistical significance. For future repairs of flexor
tendon injuries, 1mm stitch length is highly recommended
for simple peripheral suture.

Keywords

EN

Flexor tendon; peripheral suture; stitch length; biomechanical study

• Publisher: De Gruyter Open
• Journal: Open Medicine
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 10
• Issue: 1

Dates

accepted

24 - 9 - 2014

online

28 - 11 - 2014

received

31 - 3 - 2014

Contributors

author

Shixin Wang

• Department of Orthopedic
  Surgery, Yantai Municipal Laiyang Central Hospital. No.111,
  Changshan Road, Laiyang City, Shandong, P.R.China, 265200

author

Zhenling Qiu

• Department of Orthopedic
  Surgery, Yantai Municipal Laiyang Central Hospital. No.111,
  Changshan Road, Laiyang City, Shandong, P.R.China, 265200

References

• ---
• ---
• [1] Trybus M., Lorkowski J., Brongel L. and Hladki W., Causes andconsequences of hand injuries, Am J Surg, 2006, 192, 52-57.
• [2] Chauhan A., Palmer B.A. and Merrell G.A., Flexor TendonRepairs: Techniques, Eponyms, and Evidence, J Hand Surg Am,2014, 39, 1846-1853.[WoS][Crossref]
• [3] Kim H.M., Nelson G., Thomopoulos S., Silva M.J., Das R. andGelberman R.H., Technical and biological modifications forenhanced flexor tendon repair, J Hand Surg Am, 2010, 35,1031-1037; quiz 1038.[Crossref]
• [4] III J.G.S., FLEXOR TENDON REPAIR, Journal of the AmericanSociety for Surgery of Hand, 2001, 1, 177-191.
• [5] Ishida O. and Ikuta Y., Analysis of Tsuge’s procedure for thetreatment of radial nerve paralysis, Hand Surg, 2003, 8, 17-20.[Crossref]
• [6] Defino H.L., Barbieri C.H., Goncalves R.P. and Paulin J.B.,Studies on tendon healing. A comparison between suturingtechniques, J Hand Surg Br, 1986, 11, 444-450.[Crossref]
• [7] Brown S.H., Hentzen E.R., Kwan A., Ward S.R., Friden J. andLieber R.L., Mechanical strength of the side-to-side versusPulvertaft weave tendon repair, J Hand Surg Am, 2010, 35,540-545.[Crossref][WoS]
• [8] Bidic S.M., Varshney A., Ruff M.D. and Orenstein H.H.,Biomechanical comparison of lasso, Pulvertaft weave, andside-by-side tendon repairs, Plast Reconstr Surg, 2009, 124,567-571.[WoS]
• [9] Lister G.D., Kleinert H.E., Kutz J.E. and Atasoy E., Primary flexortendon repair followed by immediate controlled mobilization, JHand Surg Am, 1977, 2, 441-451.[Crossref]
• [10] Wade P.J., Muir I.F. and Hutcheon L.L., Primary flexor tendonrepair: the mechanical limitations of the modified Kesslertechnique, J Hand Surg Br, 1986, 11, 71-76.[Crossref]
• [11] Lin G.T., An K.N., Amadio P.C. and Cooney W.P., 3rd,Biomechanical studies of running suture for flexor tendonrepair in dogs, J Hand Surg Am, 1988, 13, 553-558.[Crossref]
• [12] Diao E., Hariharan J.S., Soejima O. and Lotz J.C., Effect ofperipheral suture depth on strength of tendon repairs, J HandSurg Am, 1996, 21, 234-239.[Crossref]
• [13] Bigdeli A.K., Kaczmarek I., Eifert S., Beiras-Fernandez A.,Kober S., Nikolaou K., et al., Interrupted nitinol U-Clipsversus standard running suture for the central arterialT-graft anastomosis: a prospective randomized study, Eur JCardiothorac Surg, 2011, 40, e93-97.
• [14] Yotsumoto T., Miyamoto W. and Uchio Y., Novel approach torepair of acute achilles tendon rupture: early recovery withoutpostoperative fixation or orthosis, Am J Sports Med, 2010, 38,287-292.[WoS][Crossref]
• [15] Tang J.B., Wang B., Chen F., Pan C.Z. and Xie R.G.,Biomechanical evaluation of flexor tendon repair techniques,Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2001, 252-259.[Crossref]
• [16] Cullen K.W., Tolhurst P., Lang D. and Page R.E., Flexor tendonrepair in zone 2 followed by controlled active mobilisation, JHand Surg Br, 1989, 14, 392-395.[Crossref]
• [17] McCarthy D.M., Boardman N.D., 3rd, Tramaglini D.M.,Sotereanos D.G. and Herndon J.H., Clinical management ofpartially lacerated digital flexor tendons: a survey
• [corrected] ofhand surgeons, J Hand Surg Am, 1995, 20, 273-275.[PubMed]

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/med-2015-0017