The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2005;87:923-935.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.C.01483
© 2005 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Device for Zone-II Flexor Tendon Repair
A Multicenter, Randomized, Blinded, Clinical Trial
Brian W. Su, MD1,
Michael Solomons, MD2,
Andrew Barrow, MD3,
Matshediso E. Senoge, MD4,
Marco Gilberti, MD5,
Lawrence Lubbers, MD6,
Edward Diao, MD7,
H. Matthew Quitkin, MD8 and
Melvin P. Rosenwasser, MD1
1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Trauma Training Center, New York
Presbyterian Hospital, 622 West 168th Street, PH 11, Room 11-64, New York, NY
10032. E-mail address for M.P. Rosenwasser:
ttc{at}columbia.edu
2 University of Cape Town, Room 128, Vincent Pallotti Hospital, Alexandra Road,
Pinelands, Cape Town 7405, South Africa. E-mail address:
docsol{at}iafrica.com
3 P.O. Box 902, Wendywood 2144, South Africa. E-mail address:
andymels{at}global.co.za
4 Nelson R. Mandela School of Medicine, 5 Pfanner Road, Marion Hill Park,
Pinetown 3610, South Africa. E-mail address:
sened{at}hit.co.za
5 Via Usignolo 1, 20147 Milan, Italy
6 Hand and Microsurgery Associates, 3400 Olentangy River Road, Suite 200,
Columbus, OH 43202
7 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco,
500 Parnassus Avenue, Room MU 320-W, Box 0728, San Francisco, CA 94143-0728.
E-mail
address:diaoe{at}orthosurg.ucsf.edu
8 415 Church Street, Suite 101, Vienna, VA 22180. E-mail address:
matt.quitkin{at}verizon.net
Investigation performed at Columbia University Medical Center, New
York, NY, Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, Johannesburg General Hospital,
Johannesburg, and King Edward VIII Hospital, Durban, South Africa
A video supplement to this article is available from the
Video Journal of Orthopaedics. A video clip is available at
the JBJS web site,
www.jbjs.org.
The Video Journal of Orthopaedics can be contacted at
(805) 962-3410, web site:
www.vjortho.com.
In support of their research or preparation of this manuscript, one or more
of the authors received grants or outside funding from Ortheon Medical, Winter
Park, Florida. In addition, one or more of the authors received payments or
other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a
commercial entity (Ortheon Medical). No commercial entity paid or directed, or
agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation,
educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with
which the authors are affiliated or associated.
Background: The stainless-steel Teno Fix tendon-repair device has
improved biomechanical characteristics compared with those of suture repair,
and it was well tolerated in a canine model. The purpose of this study was to
compare the Teno Fix with suture repair in a clinical setting.
Methods: Sixty-seven patients with isolated zone-II flexor tendon
injury were randomized to be treated with a Teno Fix or a four-stranded
cruciate suture repair. There were eighty-five injured digits: thirty-four
were treated with the Teno Fix, and fifty-one served as controls. A modified
Kleinert rehabilitation technique was employed, with active flexion starting
at four weeks postoperatively. Patients were followed for six months by
blinded observers who determined the range of motion, Disabilities of the Arm,
Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, pinch and grip strength, and pain score on a
verbal scale and assessed swelling and neurologic recovery. Adverse outcomes,
including device migration and rupture, were monitored at frequent
intervals.
Results: Nine of the fifty-one suture repairs ruptured, whereas none
of the Teno Fix repairs ruptured (p < 0.01). Five of the nine ruptures were
caused by resistive motion against medical advice. There were no differences
between the two groups in terms of range of motion, DASH score, pinch and grip
strength, pain, swelling, or neurologic recovery. The Teno Fix group had
slightly slower resolution of pain and swelling compared with the control
group. Of the patients who were available for follow-up at six months, sixteen
of the twenty-four treated with a Teno Fix repair and nineteen of the
twenty-seven treated with a control repair had a good or excellent result. One
Teno Fix device migrated and extruded secondary to a wound infection. Of all
eighty-five digits that were operated on, four were thought to have tendons of
inadequate size to accommodate the device and nine were deemed to have
inadequate exposure to allow placement of the anchors.
Conclusions: The Teno Fix is safe and effective for flexor tendon
repair if the tendon size and exposure are sufficient. Tendon repairs with the
Teno Fix have lower rupture rates and similar functional outcomes when
compared with conventional repair, particularly in patients who are
noncompliant with the rehabilitation protocol.
Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions
to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Facebook Technorati Twitter What's this?
Related articles in JBJS:
- A Device for Zone-II Flexor Tendon Repair
- Brian W. Su, Michael Solomons, Andrew Barrow, Matshediso E. Senoge, Marco Gilberti, Lawrence Lubbers, Edward Diao, H. Matthew Quitkin, Michael W. Grafe, and Melvin P. Rosenwasser
JBJS 2006 88: 37-49.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. W. Su, M. Solomons, A. Barrow, M. E. Senoge, M. Gilberti, L. Lubbers, E. Diao, H. M. Quitkin, M. W. Grafe, and M. P. Rosenwasser
A Device for Zone-II Flexor Tendon Repair
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
March 1, 2006;
88(1_suppl_1):
37 - 49.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Letters to the Editor:
Read all Letters to the Editor
- Device for Zone-II Flexor Tendon Repair
- Roy A. Meals
- JBJS Online, 26 Jul 2005
[Full text]
- Dr. Su and Dr. Rosenwasser respond to Dr. Meals
- Brian W. Su, M.D., et al.
- JBJS Online, 26 Jul 2005
[Full text]
|