Cargando…

Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Syndesmosis Repair Techniques With Suture Button Implants

BACKGROUND: Suture button fixation of syndesmotic injury is growing in popularity, as it has been shown to provide adequate stability in a more cost-effective manner than screw fixation while allowing more physiologic distal tibiofibular joint motion. However, the optimal repair technique and implan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parker, Andrew S., Beason, David P., Slowik, Jonathan S., Sabatini, Jefferson B., Waldrop, Norman E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6202754/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30377622
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967118804204
_version_ 1783365745638375424
author Parker, Andrew S.
Beason, David P.
Slowik, Jonathan S.
Sabatini, Jefferson B.
Waldrop, Norman E.
author_facet Parker, Andrew S.
Beason, David P.
Slowik, Jonathan S.
Sabatini, Jefferson B.
Waldrop, Norman E.
author_sort Parker, Andrew S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Suture button fixation of syndesmotic injury is growing in popularity, as it has been shown to provide adequate stability in a more cost-effective manner than screw fixation while allowing more physiologic distal tibiofibular joint motion. However, the optimal repair technique and implant orientation have yet to be determined. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to biomechanically compare 3 suture button construct configurations/orientations for syndesmosis fixation: single, parallel, and divergent. The authors hypothesized that all 3 methods would provide adequate stabilization but that the divergent technique would be the most stable. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: The fixation strengths of 3 stabilization techniques with suture button devices were compared with 10 cadaveric legs each (N = 30). Ankle motion under cyclic loading was measured in multiple planes: first in the intact state, then following simulated syndesmosis injury, and then following fixation with 1 of 3 randomly assigned constructs—1 suture button, 2 suture buttons in parallel, and 2 divergent suture buttons. Finally, axial loading with external rotation was applied to failure. RESULTS: All syndesmotic fixation methods provided stability to the torn state. There was no statistically significant difference among the 3 fixation techniques in biomechanical stability. Failure most commonly occurred through fibular fracture at supraphysiologic loads. CONCLUSION: Suture button implant fixation for syndesmotic injury appears to provide stability to the torn syndesmosis, and the configuration of the fixation does not appear to affect the strength or security of the stabilization. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides further insight into the biomechanics and optimal configuration of suture button fixation of the torn syndesmosis. Based on these results, the addition of a second suture button may not significantly contribute to immediate postoperative stability.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6202754
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62027542018-10-30 Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Syndesmosis Repair Techniques With Suture Button Implants Parker, Andrew S. Beason, David P. Slowik, Jonathan S. Sabatini, Jefferson B. Waldrop, Norman E. Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Suture button fixation of syndesmotic injury is growing in popularity, as it has been shown to provide adequate stability in a more cost-effective manner than screw fixation while allowing more physiologic distal tibiofibular joint motion. However, the optimal repair technique and implant orientation have yet to be determined. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to biomechanically compare 3 suture button construct configurations/orientations for syndesmosis fixation: single, parallel, and divergent. The authors hypothesized that all 3 methods would provide adequate stabilization but that the divergent technique would be the most stable. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: The fixation strengths of 3 stabilization techniques with suture button devices were compared with 10 cadaveric legs each (N = 30). Ankle motion under cyclic loading was measured in multiple planes: first in the intact state, then following simulated syndesmosis injury, and then following fixation with 1 of 3 randomly assigned constructs—1 suture button, 2 suture buttons in parallel, and 2 divergent suture buttons. Finally, axial loading with external rotation was applied to failure. RESULTS: All syndesmotic fixation methods provided stability to the torn state. There was no statistically significant difference among the 3 fixation techniques in biomechanical stability. Failure most commonly occurred through fibular fracture at supraphysiologic loads. CONCLUSION: Suture button implant fixation for syndesmotic injury appears to provide stability to the torn syndesmosis, and the configuration of the fixation does not appear to affect the strength or security of the stabilization. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides further insight into the biomechanics and optimal configuration of suture button fixation of the torn syndesmosis. Based on these results, the addition of a second suture button may not significantly contribute to immediate postoperative stability. SAGE Publications 2018-10-24 /pmc/articles/PMC6202754/ /pubmed/30377622 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967118804204 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Parker, Andrew S.
Beason, David P.
Slowik, Jonathan S.
Sabatini, Jefferson B.
Waldrop, Norman E.
Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Syndesmosis Repair Techniques With Suture Button Implants
title Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Syndesmosis Repair Techniques With Suture Button Implants
title_full Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Syndesmosis Repair Techniques With Suture Button Implants
title_fullStr Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Syndesmosis Repair Techniques With Suture Button Implants
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Syndesmosis Repair Techniques With Suture Button Implants
title_short Biomechanical Comparison of 3 Syndesmosis Repair Techniques With Suture Button Implants
title_sort biomechanical comparison of 3 syndesmosis repair techniques with suture button implants
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6202754/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30377622
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967118804204
work_keys_str_mv AT parkerandrews biomechanicalcomparisonof3syndesmosisrepairtechniqueswithsuturebuttonimplants
AT beasondavidp biomechanicalcomparisonof3syndesmosisrepairtechniqueswithsuturebuttonimplants
AT slowikjonathans biomechanicalcomparisonof3syndesmosisrepairtechniqueswithsuturebuttonimplants
AT sabatinijeffersonb biomechanicalcomparisonof3syndesmosisrepairtechniqueswithsuturebuttonimplants
AT waldropnormane biomechanicalcomparisonof3syndesmosisrepairtechniqueswithsuturebuttonimplants