Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: In order to investigate if allograft substitutes may be utilized to restore suctional seal properties with labral augmentation, the purpose of the current study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of the labral suction seal under several scenarios, including: (1)intact labrum, (2)rim preparation, (3)labral repair, (4)labral augmentation with iliotibial band (ITB), (5)labral augmentation with a dermis allograft.
METHODS: Eleven hemi-pelvises were dissected to the level of the labrum and placed in a material testing system (MTS) for biomechanical axial distraction. Each specimen was compressed to 250 newtons (N) and distracted at 10 mm/s while load, crosshead displacement, and time were continuously recorded. For each of the five labral states, three testing repetitions were performed. Peak force (N, newtons), displacement at peak force (mm, millimeter), and work (N-mm, newton, millimeter) were calculated and normalized to the intact state of each specimen.
RESULTS: Eleven specimens were tested and eight specimens (age: 58.6±5.4 years, BMI: 28.6±6.8 kg/m2; 4 females; 5 right hips) were included in final analyses. Expressed as a percentage relative to the intact state, the average normalized peak force, displacement at peak force, and work for each labral state were as follows: intact (100.0%±0% for all), rim preparation (89.0%±9.2%, 93.3%±20.6%, 85.1%±9.0%), repair (61.3%±17.9%, 88.4%±36.9%, 58.1%±16.7%), ITB allograft (62.7%±24.9%, 83.9%±21.6%, 59.4%±22.4%), and dermis allograft (57.8%±27.2%, 88.2%±29.5%, 50.0%±20.1%). Regarding peak force, intact state was significantly higher compared to the labral repair, augmentation with ITB, and augmentation with the dermis allograft states (p<0.001). No significant differences were demonstrated between displacement at peak force (p=0.561). Regarding work, both intact state and rim preparation states were significantly higher than the repair, ITB augmentation, and dermis allograft augmentation states (p<0.001). In all outcome measures, the dermis allograft augmentation performed with no statistical difference to the ITB augmentation state.
CONCLUSIONS: Labral repair and labral augmentation with either ITB allograft or the dermis allograft resulted in significantly lower peak force and work to equilibrium compared to the intact and rim prep states. There was no statistical difference between repair and augmentation states as well as no statistical difference between ITB allograft and dermal allograft at time zero.
CONCLUSIONS: This study compares biomechanical properties of the suction seal of the hip comparing labral states including intact, rim preparation, repair, and augmentation under which can be used for surgical decision making.
METHODS: Eleven hemi-pelvises were dissected to the level of the labrum and placed in a material testing system (MTS) for biomechanical axial distraction. Each specimen was compressed to 250 newtons (N) and distracted at 10 mm/s while load, crosshead displacement, and time were continuously recorded. For each of the five labral states, three testing repetitions were performed. Peak force (N, newtons), displacement at peak force (mm, millimeter), and work (N-mm, newton, millimeter) were calculated and normalized to the intact state of each specimen.
RESULTS: Eleven specimens were tested and eight specimens (age: 58.6±5.4 years, BMI: 28.6±6.8 kg/m2; 4 females; 5 right hips) were included in final analyses. Expressed as a percentage relative to the intact state, the average normalized peak force, displacement at peak force, and work for each labral state were as follows: intact (100.0%±0% for all), rim preparation (89.0%±9.2%, 93.3%±20.6%, 85.1%±9.0%), repair (61.3%±17.9%, 88.4%±36.9%, 58.1%±16.7%), ITB allograft (62.7%±24.9%, 83.9%±21.6%, 59.4%±22.4%), and dermis allograft (57.8%±27.2%, 88.2%±29.5%, 50.0%±20.1%). Regarding peak force, intact state was significantly higher compared to the labral repair, augmentation with ITB, and augmentation with the dermis allograft states (p<0.001). No significant differences were demonstrated between displacement at peak force (p=0.561). Regarding work, both intact state and rim preparation states were significantly higher than the repair, ITB augmentation, and dermis allograft augmentation states (p<0.001). In all outcome measures, the dermis allograft augmentation performed with no statistical difference to the ITB augmentation state.
CONCLUSIONS: Labral repair and labral augmentation with either ITB allograft or the dermis allograft resulted in significantly lower peak force and work to equilibrium compared to the intact and rim prep states. There was no statistical difference between repair and augmentation states as well as no statistical difference between ITB allograft and dermal allograft at time zero.
CONCLUSIONS: This study compares biomechanical properties of the suction seal of the hip comparing labral states including intact, rim preparation, repair, and augmentation under which can be used for surgical decision making.
摘要：
目的：为了研究是否可以利用同种异体移植替代品来恢复唇扩张的吸入密封特性，当前研究的目的是评估在几种情况下的唇吸密封的生物力学特性，包括：（1）完整的唇，(2)轮辋准备,（3）唇修复，(4)髂胫带扩张术(ITB),(5)同种异体真皮扩大唇。
方法：将11个半骨盆解剖到唇的水平，并放置在材料测试系统（MTS）中进行生物力学轴向牵引。每个样品被压缩到250牛顿（N），并在加载时以10mm/s的速度牵引，十字头位移,并连续记录时间。对于五个实验室状态中的每一个，进行了三次测试重复。峰值力(N,牛顿)，峰值力时的位移(mm，毫米),和工作(N-mm，牛顿,毫米）进行计算并归一化为每个样本的完整状态。
结果：测试了11个标本，其中8个标本（年龄：58.6±5.4岁，BMI：28.6±6.8kg/m2；4名女性；5右臀部）包括在最终分析中。表示为相对于完整状态的百分比，平均归一化峰值力，峰值力时的位移，每个唇状态的工作如下：完整（全部100.0%±0%），轮辋准备(89.0%±9.2%，93.3%±20.6%,85.1%±9.0%)，修复（61.3%±17.9%，88.4%±36.9%，58.1%±16.7%)，ITB同种异体移植物（62.7%±24.9%，83.9%±21.6%，59.4%±22.4%)，和真皮同种异体移植（57.8%±27.2%，88.2%±29.5%,50.0%±20.1%)。关于峰值力，完整的状态明显高于唇修复，使用ITB进行增强，以及真皮同种异体移植状态的增强（p<0.001）。峰值力下的位移之间没有显着差异（p=0.561）。关于工作,完整状态和轮辋准备状态均明显高于修复，ITB扩充,和真皮同种异体移植增强状态（p<0.001）。在所有结果测量中，同种异体真皮增强与ITB增强状态无统计学差异。
结论：与完整和边缘准备状态相比，使用ITB同种异体移植或真皮同种异体移植进行的Labral修复和labral增强导致峰值力和平衡功明显降低。修复和增强状态之间没有统计学差异，并且在时间零点，ITB同种异体移植物和真皮同种异体移植物之间也没有统计学差异。
结论：本研究比较了髋部抽吸密封的生物力学特性，比较了包括完整、边缘准备,修复,以及可用于手术决策的增强。
方法：将11个半骨盆解剖到唇的水平，并放置在材料测试系统（MTS）中进行生物力学轴向牵引。每个样品被压缩到250牛顿（N），并在加载时以10mm/s的速度牵引，十字头位移,并连续记录时间。对于五个实验室状态中的每一个，进行了三次测试重复。峰值力(N,牛顿)，峰值力时的位移(mm，毫米),和工作(N-mm，牛顿,毫米）进行计算并归一化为每个样本的完整状态。
结果：测试了11个标本，其中8个标本（年龄：58.6±5.4岁，BMI：28.6±6.8kg/m2；4名女性；5右臀部）包括在最终分析中。表示为相对于完整状态的百分比，平均归一化峰值力，峰值力时的位移，每个唇状态的工作如下：完整（全部100.0%±0%），轮辋准备(89.0%±9.2%，93.3%±20.6%,85.1%±9.0%)，修复（61.3%±17.9%，88.4%±36.9%，58.1%±16.7%)，ITB同种异体移植物（62.7%±24.9%，83.9%±21.6%，59.4%±22.4%)，和真皮同种异体移植（57.8%±27.2%，88.2%±29.5%,50.0%±20.1%)。关于峰值力，完整的状态明显高于唇修复，使用ITB进行增强，以及真皮同种异体移植状态的增强（p<0.001）。峰值力下的位移之间没有显着差异（p=0.561）。关于工作,完整状态和轮辋准备状态均明显高于修复，ITB扩充,和真皮同种异体移植增强状态（p<0.001）。在所有结果测量中，同种异体真皮增强与ITB增强状态无统计学差异。
结论：与完整和边缘准备状态相比，使用ITB同种异体移植或真皮同种异体移植进行的Labral修复和labral增强导致峰值力和平衡功明显降低。修复和增强状态之间没有统计学差异，并且在时间零点，ITB同种异体移植物和真皮同种异体移植物之间也没有统计学差异。
结论：本研究比较了髋部抽吸密封的生物力学特性，比较了包括完整、边缘准备,修复,以及可用于手术决策的增强。
