Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

3D-Evaluation der biomechanischen Eigenschaften verschiedener Rekonstruktionen der Rotatorenmanschette

3D evaluation of the biomechanical properties of various rotor cuff reconstructions

  • Originalarbeit
  • Published:
Obere Extremität Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Im Rahmen einer biomechanischen Studie an Schweineschultern wurde an verschiedenen Rekonstruktionen der Rotatorenmanschette die Elongation unter zyklischer Belastung mittels Radiostereometrieanalyse (RSA) in 3 Ebenen (dorsoventral, kraniokaudal, mediolateral) bestimmt. Die Infraspinatussehne und der Humeruskopf wurden dafür mit Tantalumkugeln markiert und in einem speziellen Kalibrierungskäfig platziert, in dem die RSA-Messungen mittels 2 mobilen Röntgenapparaten, welche in 2 Ebenen simultan auslösen, erfolgten. Die markierten Sehnen wurden zunächst für 50 Zyklen mit 20 N belastet. Danach erfolgten die Ablösung der Sehnen nach Standardschema und die Refixation mittels verschiedener „single-row“ und „double-row“ -Rekonstruktionen. Die rekonstruierten Sehnen wurden mit 40, 60, 80 und 100 N für jeweils 50 Zyklen belastet. Die ermittelte Elongation der RSA wurde mit der gemessenen Elongation mittels Video-Extensometer, welches für die kraniokaudale Ebene als Referenzmethode diente, verglichen.

Die zyklische Belastung der intakten Sehnen zeigte mit der RSA-Messung eine durchschnittliche Dislokation von 0,06±0,08 mm in der x-Ebene, 0,16±0,18 mm in der y-Ebene und 0,19±0,28 mm in der z-Ebene.

Hochsignifikante Unterschiede wurden in der kraniokaudalen Ebene zwischen den getesteten Fixierungen bei 40, 60, 80 und 100 N gefunden (p<0,0001), auch der Vergleich der getesteten Fixierungen in der mediolateralen Ebene zeigte signifikante Unterschiede (p<0,05). Keine signifikanten Unterschiede zeigten sich zwischen den Rekonstruktionen in der dorsoventralen Ebene (p>0,05).

Die Messung der Elongation mittels RSA in der kraniokaudalen Ebene zeigte im Vergleich mit den Messungen des Video-Extensometers eine hohe Korrelation im Korrelationskoeffizient nach Pearson (r=0,87).

Die Radiostereometrieanalyse ist eine exzellente Methode zur Messung der Elongation unter zyklischer Belastung von Rotatorenmanschettenrekonstruktionen. Im Vergleich zum Video-Extensometer erfolgt die Messung in 3 Ebenen, was eine zusätzliche Aussage bezüglich der Auswirkungen der Scherkräfte auf die getestete Fixierung ermöglicht.

Abstract

In a biomechanical laboratory study, various rotator cuff reconstructions were compared in three different planes (dorsoventral, craniocaudal, mediolateral) using radiostereometric analysis (RSA). The infraspinatus tendon and the humeral head were marked with tantalum beads and RSA measurements were performed using two X-ray machines simultaneously at a 90° angle and a special calibrating cage.

After cyclic loading of the intact tendon with 20 N, different single-row and double-row reconstructions were performed and cyclically loaded for 50 cycles between 10 to 40, 60, 80, and 100 N. Elongation under cyclic loading was calculated using radiostereometric analysis and a video extensometer which was used as the reference method in the craniocaudal plane.

Cyclic loading of the intact tendon showed a mean dislocation of 0.06±0.08 mm in the x-plane, 0.16±0.18 mm in the y-plane and 0.19±0.28 mm in the z-plane.

Highly significant differences were found in the craniocaudal plane between the tested fixations at 40, 60, 80, and 100 N (p<0.0001). Significant differences were also found in the mediolateral plane (p<0.05). No significant differences were seen in the dorsoventral plane (p>0.05).

Comparing the results obtained by RSA in the craniocaudal plane and the video extensometer showed high correlations in the Pearson correlation coefficient (0.87).

In conclusion, radiostereometric analysis is an excellent method to evaluate the cyclic loading behavior of different rotator cuff reconstructions. Measurements in three different planes allow the shear forces on the tested fixations to be examined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5

Literatur

  1. Adam F, Pape D, Kohn D, Seil R (2002) Length of the patellar tendon after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon autograft: a prospective clinical study using Roentgen stereometric analysis. Arthroscopy 18:859–864

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Adam F, Pape D, Schiel K et al (2004) Biomechanical properties of patellar and hamstring graft tibial fixation techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: experimental study with Roentgen stereometric analysis. Am J Sports Med 32:71–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ahmad CS, Stewart AM, Izquierdo R, Bigliani LU (2005) Tendon-bone interface motion in transosseous suture and suture anchor rotator cuff repair techniques. Am J Sports Med 33:1667–1671

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brady PC, Arrigoni P, Burkhart SS (2006) Evaluation of residual rotator cuff defects after in vivo single- versus double-row rotator cuff repairs. Arthroscopy 22:1070–1075

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Burkhart SS, Danaceau SM, Pearce CE Jr (2001) Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: Analysis of results by tear size and by repair technique-margin convergence versus direct tendon-to-bone repair. Arthroscopy 17:905–912

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Burks RT, Crim J, Brown N et al (2009) A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing arthroscopic single- and double-row rotator cuff repair: magnetic resonance imaging and early clinical evaluation. Am J Sports Med 37:674–682

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Charousset C, Grimberg J, Duranthon LD et al (2007) Can a double-row anchorage technique improve tendon healing in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair?: a prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of double-row and single-row anchorage techniques with computed tomographic arthrography tendon healing assessment. Am J Sports Med 35:1247–1253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dahlberg G (1940) Statistical Methods for Medical and Biological Students. Interscience, New York

  9. Franceschi F, Ruzzini L, Longo UG et al (2007) Equivalent clinical results of arthroscopic single-row and double-row suture anchor repair for rotator cuff tears: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med 35:1254–1260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fujisawa Y, Masuhara K, Shiomi S (1979) The effect of high tibial osteotomy on osteoarthritis of the knee. An arthroscopic study of 54 knee joints. Orthop Clin North Am 10:585–608

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Galatz LM, Ball CM, Teefey SA et al (2004) The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:A 219–A 224

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gartsman GM, Khan M, Hammerman SM (1998) Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80:832–840

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gazielly DF, Gleyze P, Montagnon C (1994) Functional and anatomical results after rotator cuff repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res 43–53

  14. Gerber C, Schneeberger AG, Beck M, Schlegel U (1994) Mechanical strength of repairs of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Br 76:371–380

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Koganti AK, Adamson GJ, Gregersen CS et al (2006) Biomechanical comparison of traditional and locked suture configurations for arthroscopic repairs of the rotator cuff. Am J Sports Med 34:1832–1838

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lorbach O, Bachelier F, Vees J et al (2008) Cyclic loading of rotator cuff reconstructions: single-row repair with modified suture configurations versus double-row repair. Am J Sports Med 36:1504–1510

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ma CB, Comerford L, Wilson J, Puttlitz CM (2006) Biomechanical evaluation of arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs: double-row compared with single-row fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:403–410

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mazzocca AD, Millett PJ, Guanche CA et al (2005) Arthroscopic single-row versus double-row suture anchor rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 33:1861–1868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Murray TF Jr, Lajtai G, Mileski RM, Snyder SJ (2002) Arthroscopic repair of medium to large full-thickness rotator cuff tears: outcome at 2- to 6-year follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11:19–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nho SJ, Yadav H, Pensak M et al (2007) Biomechanical fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Arthroscopy 23:94–102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Park MC, Idjadi JA, Elattrache NS et al (2008) The effect of dynamic external rotation comparing 2 footprint-restoring rotator cuff repair techniques. Am J Sports Med 36:893–900

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Park MC, Jun BJ, Park CJ et al (2007) The biomechanical effects of dynamic external rotation on rotator cuff repair compared to testing with the humerus fixed. Am J Sports Med 35:1931–1939

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Reardon DJ, Maffulli N (2007) Clinical evidence shows no difference between single- and double-row repair for rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy 23:670–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ruotolo C, Fow JE, Nottage WM (2004) The supraspinatus footprint: an anatomic study of the supraspinatus insertion. Arthroscopy 20:246–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Scheibel MT, Habermeyer P (2003) A modified Mason-Allen technique for rotator cuff repair using suture anchors. Arthroscopy 19:330–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Selvik G (1990) Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis. Acta Radiol 31:113–126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Smith CK, Hull ML, Howell SM (2005) Migration of radio-opaque markers injected into tendon grafts: a study using roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA). J Biomech Eng 127:887–890

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tauro JC (1998) Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: analysis of technique and results at 2- and 3-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 14:45–51

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Wilson F, Hinov V, Adams G (2002) Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff: 2- to 14-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 18:136–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. Lorbach.

Additional information

Dieser Beitrag wurde mit dem PERTHES-PREIS 2009 der Deutschen Vereinigung für Schulter- und Ellenbogenchirurgie e. V. (DVSE) ausgezeichnet.

Der Originalartikel wird voraussichtlich im „Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Research“ veröffentlicht.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lorbach, O., Anagnostakos, K., Vees, J. et al. 3D-Evaluation der biomechanischen Eigenschaften verschiedener Rekonstruktionen der Rotatorenmanschette. Obere Extremität 5, 14–19 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11678-010-0057-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11678-010-0057-1

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation