Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Proximal hamstring tendon avulsions are debilitating and commonly cause pain, weakness, and functional limitations. Open surgical repair has been the standard, but improved endoscopic techniques have enabled proximal hamstring fixation with decreased risk of infection and numbness, without the morbidity of a large incision.
Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose was to (1) describe pertinent anatomy surrounding the proximal hamstring origin in relation to 4 endoscopic portal sites and (2) test for biomechanical differences between open and endoscopic repair. It was hypothesized that (1) endoscopic proximal hamstring repair is efficacious with respect to commonly used portals and (2) there is no biomechanical difference between open and endoscopic techniques.
Study Design: Descriptive and controlled laboratory study.
Methods: Proximal hamstring ruptures were simulated endoscopically in 10 fresh-frozen human cadaveric pelvis specimens. Endoscopic repair was then completed on 1 limb from each specimen through 4 portals. After repair, each specimen was dissected in layers and measurements from portal tracts to pertinent anatomy were obtained. Open repair was performed on all contralateral limbs, followed by cyclical biomechanical tensile testing to failure of both the open and endoscopically repaired hamstring tendons to assess failure load and local tissue strain.
Results: On average, no portal tract was closer than 2.0 cm to the sciatic nerve or inferior gluteal neurovascular bundle. Anatomic landmarks were identified that could improve the reproducibility and safety of the procedure. Biomechanical testing revealed no differences between the open and endoscopic repair techniques for any measured parameter.
Conclusion: This study supports the safety and efficacy of endoscopic proximal hamstring repair through anatomic and biomechanical analyses and helps establish reproducible and recognizable landmarks that define a safe working zone.
Clinical Relevance: This study maps the anatomic landscape of the proximal hamstring as encountered endoscopically and demonstrates equivalent biomechanical strength of endoscopic proximal hamstring repair, supporting this technique's safety and efficacy.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546519866453 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!