Finite element analysis of arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff injury with different transosseous techniques.
10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2022.10.016
- Author:
Kang JI
1
;
Han YU
1
;
Gang CHEN
1
;
Jie-En PAN
1
;
Jin LI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Orthopaedics, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University, Jiaxing 314000, Zhejiang, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Arthroscopy;
Finite element analysis;
Rotator cuff tear;
Transosseous
- MeSH:
Adult;
Humans;
Rotator Cuff Injuries/surgery*;
Rotator Cuff/surgery*;
Finite Element Analysis;
Arthroscopy/methods*;
Suture Techniques
- From:
China Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
2022;35(10):990-995
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To compare and analyze the biomechanical differences between different transosseous techniques in arthroscopic repairment of rotator cuff injuries by finite element analysis.
METHODS:Finite element models of traditional arthroscopic transosseous(ATO) technique, giant needle technique, and ArthroTunneler(AT) technique were established based on the shoulder CT data of a healthy adult. Then, loads of 10 N and 20 N were applied to the sutures on the different technical models, respectively. Compare and analyze the stress changes of the bone tunnels and sutures of the three models were compared and analyzed.
RESULTS:Under the same condition of loading, the stress on the lateral bone tunnels and sutures of the traditional ATO technology model was the largest, followed by the giant needle technology model. The stress on the mid-section bone tunnels and sutures of the AT technology model was the largest, followed by the giant needle technology model. Under the different conditions of loading, the high-stress areas of the three models were mainly concentrated on the contact area between the sutures and the bone tunnels. Besides, compared with the traditional ATO technology model, the stress distribution of the lateral bone tunnels and sutures of the giant needle technology and AT technology model were more dispersed, but there was obvious stress concentration phenomena in the stress distribution in the mid-section bone tunnels and sutures in the AT technology model.
CONCLUSION:Compared with the traditional ATO technique, both the giant needle technique and the AT technique can reduce the risk of cutout between the bone tunnel and suture, and may be better treatments for rotator cuff tear. However, compared with the giant needle technique, the application of AT technique in patients with osteoporosis may be limited.
