Biomechanical characteristics of a new looping stitch versus the classic Krackow stitch for distal biceps fixation.

Background: The purpose of this study was to quantify the biomechanical characteristics of a new looping stitch, developed with the concepts of a looping, locking stitch that decreases needle penetrations of the tendon, and compare it to a classic Krackow stitch for distal biceps suture-tendon fixation.

Methods: The Krackow stitch with No. 2 braided suture and the looping stitch with a No. 2 braided suture loop attached to a 25-mm-length by 1.3-mm-width polyblend suture tape were compared. The Looping stitch was performed with single strand locking loops and wrapping suture around the tendon, resulting in half the needle penetrations through the graft compared to the Krackow stitch. Ten matched pairs of human distal biceps tendons were used. One side of each pair was randomly assigned to either the Krackow or the looping stitch, and the contralateral side was used for the other stitch. For biomechanical testing, each construct was preloaded to 5 N for 60 seconds, followed by cyclic loading to 20 N, 40 N, and 60 N for 10 cycles each, and then loaded to failure. The deformation of the suture-tendon construct, stiffness, yield load, and ultimate load were quantified. Comparisons between the Krackow and looping stitches were performed with a paired t-test using  < .05 as statistically significant.

Results: The Krackow stitch and looping stitch had no significant difference in stiffness, peak deformation, or nonrecoverable deformation after 10 cycles of loading to 20 N, 40 N, and 60 N. There was no difference between the Krackow stitch and looping stitch in load applied to displacement of 1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm. The ultimate load showed that the looping stitch was significantly stronger compared to the Krackow stitch (Krackow stitch: 223.7 ± 50.3 N; looping stitch: 312.7 ± 53.8 N) ( = .002). The failure modes were either suture breakage or tendon cut through. For the Krakow stitch, there was 1 suture breakage and 9 tendons cut through. For the looping stitch, there were five suture breakages, and five tendons cut through.

Conclusions: With fewer needle penetrations, incorporation of 100% of the tendon diameter, and a higher ultimate load to failure compared to the Krackow stitch, the Looping stitch may be a viable option to reduce deformation, failure, and cut-out of the suture-tendon construct.