http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Biomechanical Comparison of the Latarjet Procedure with and without Capsular Repair
Matthew T. Kleiner,William B. Payne,Michelle H. McGarry,James E. Tibone,Thay Q. Lee 대한정형외과학회 2016 Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Vol.8 No.1
Background: The purpose of this study was to determine if capsular repair used in conjunction with the Latarjet procedure results in significant alterations in glenohumeral rotational range of motion and translation. Methods: Glenohumeral rotational range of motion and translation were measured in eight cadaveric shoulders in 90° of abduction in both the scapular and coronal planes under the following four conditions: intact glenoid, 20% bony Bankart lesion, modified Latarjet without capsular repair, and modified Latarjet with capsular repair. Results: Creation of a 20% bony Bankart lesion led to significant increases in anterior and inferior glenohumeral translation and rotational range of motion (p < 0.005). The Latarjet procedure restored anterior and inferior stability compared to the bony Bankart condition. It also led to significant increases in glenohumeral internal and external rotational range of motion relative to both the intact and bony Bankart conditions (p < 0.05). The capsular repair from the coracoacromial ligament stump to the native capsule did not significantly affect translations relative to the Latarjet condition; however it did cause a significant decrease in external rotation in both the scapular and coronal planes (p < 0.005). Conclusions: The Latarjet procedure is effective in restoring anteroinferior glenohumeral stability. The addition of a capsular repair does not result in significant added stability; however, it does appear to have the effect of restricting glenohumeral external rotational range of motion relative to the Latarjet procedure performed without capsular repair.
Seung-Bum Chae,Jun Ho Nam,Il-Jung Park,Steve S. Shin,Michelle H. McGarry,Thay Q. Lee 대한정형외과학회 2022 Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Vol.14 No.4
Background: This study aimed to compare the biomechanical strength of 360° scapholunate interosseous ligament (SLIL) reconstruction only using an artificial material (AM), double dorsal limb (DDL) SLIL reconstruction only using AM, and the modified Brunelli technique (MBT) with ligament. Methods: Eight cadaver wrists were used for this study. The SL interval, SL angle, and radiolunate (RL) angle were recorded with MicroScribe. The SL distance was measured after dividing the volar and dorsal aspects. We utilized four different wrist postures (neutral, flexion, extension, and clenched fist) to compare five conditions: intact wrist, SLIL resection, 360° SLIL reconstruction using AM, DDL SLIL reconstruction using AM, and MBT SLIL reconstruction with ligament. Results: The dorsal SL distance in the SLIL resection was widened in all wrist positions. The dorsal SL distance was restored with all three techniques and in all wrist positions. The volar SL distance in the wrist extension position was widened in the SLIL resection condition. The volar SL distance was restored in the extension position after 360° SLIL reconstruction using AM condition. There were no statistically significant differences in SL and RL angles among the conditions. Conclusions: All three reconstruction techniques could restore the dorsal SL distance. However, only the 360° SLIL reconstruction using AM restored the volar SL distance in the wrist extension position. DDL SLIL reconstruction using AM tended to overcorrect, whereas 360° SLIL reconstruction using AM effectively stopped volar SL interval widening.
Akshay Mehta,Charles C. Lin,Ronald A. Campbell,Garwin Chin,Michelle H. McGarry,Thay Q. Lee,Gregory J. Adamson 대한정형외과학회 2019 Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Vol.11 No.1
Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the tibial tunnel aperture contact characteristics simulating an anteromedial and transtibial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tunnel preparation. Methods: Seven matched pairs of cadaveric knees were tested. From each knee, a 10-mm quadriceps ACL graft was prepared. The native ACL was arthroscopically removed and tibial tunnels were drilled. In one knee, a transtibial technique was performed with femoral tunnel drilling approached through the tibial tunnel. For the anteromedial technique on the contralateral knee, the posterior tibial tunnel was chamfered with a rasp. The knees were then disarticulated and tibial tunnel aperture geometry was measured. A pressure sensor was placed between the graft and the posterior aspect of the tibial tunnel and the graft was secured with an interference screw. Contact force, contact area, contact pressure, peak contact pressure, hysteresis and stiffness were measured at cyclic loads of 50 N, 100 N, 150 N, and 200 N. Results: Tibial tunnel aperture area, diameter and deviation from a circle were significantly larger with the transtibial technique (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in hysteresis, stiffness, contact area, contact force and mean contact pressure. The peak contact pressure between the ACL graft and the tibial tunnel was significantly higher with the anteromedial technique for 100 N (p = 0.04), 150 N (p = 0.01), and 200 N (p = 0.002) cyclic loading. Conclusions: Increased peak contact pressure on the graft at the tibial aperture with the anteromedial technique may increase the stress on the graft and possibly lead to failure following ACL reconstruction.
Yoon Sang Jeon,Sang Hyun Ko,Yun Moon Jeon,Dong Jin Ryu,Jeong Seok Kim,Hyun Soon Park,Min-Shik Chung,Daniel Kwak,Michelle H. McGarry,Thay Q. Lee 대한정형외과학회 2023 Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Vol.15 No.4
Background: Disruption of the rotator cuff muscles compromises concavity compression force, which leads to superior migration of the humeral head and loss of stability. A novel idea of using the magnetic force to achieve shoulder stabilization in massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs) was considered because the magnets can stabilize two separate entities with an attraction force. This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical effect of the magnetic force on shoulder stabilization in MRCTs. Methods: Seven fresh frozen cadaveric specimens were used with a customized shoulder testing system. Three testing conditions were set up: condition 1, intact rotator cuff without magnets; condition 2, an MRCT without magnets; condition 3, an MRCT with magnets. For each condition, anterior-posterior translation, superior translation, superior migration, and subacromial contact pressure were measured at 0°, 30°, and 60° of abduction. The abduction capability of condition 2 was compared with that of condition 3. Results: The anterior-posterior and superior translations increased in condition 2; however, they decreased compared to condition 2 when the magnets were applied (condition 3) in multiple test positions and loadings (p < 0.05). Abduction capability improved significantly in condition 3 compared with that in condition 2, even for less deltoid loading (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The magnet biomechanically played a positive role in stabilizing the shoulder joint and enabled abduction with less deltoid force in MRCTs. However, to ensure that the magnet is clinically applicable as a stabilizer for the shoulder joint, it is necessary to thoroughly verify its safety in the human body and to conduct further research on technical challenges.