aytac, gunes/0000-0003-4902-2844 WOS:000522643800019 PubMed: 32130480 Purpose To compare five different repair techniques for extensor tendon zone III modified Kessler (MK), double-modified Kessler (DMK), modified Kessler epitendinous (MKE), double-modified Kessler epitendinous (DMKE), and running-interlocking horizontal mattress (RIHM) in terms of shortening, stiffness, gap formation, and ultimate load to failure. Methods A total of 35 human cadaver fingers were randomly assigned to five suture techniques with 7 fingers each and were tested under dynamic and static loading conditions. Results DMK was found to be superior over MK in terms of ultimate load to failure (36 N vs. 24 N, respectively), shortening (1.75 vs. 2.20 mm, respectively) and gap formation. However, these two methods had similar characteristics in terms of stiffness. The addition of epitendinous sutures to the repair methods resulted in approximately 40% increase in ultimate load to failure, whereas epitendinous sutures had no effect on shortening. DMKE was found to be superior over MKE in terms of shortening (1.77 vs. 2.22 mm, respectively). However, these two methods had similar characteristics in terms of mean ultimate load to failure and stiffness. RIHM was found to be superior over the other four methods in terms of ultimate load to failure (89 N), stiffness, and shortening (0.75 mm). Conclusion RIHM was found to be stronger and more durable for extensor tendon zone III than the other techniques in terms of ultimate load to failure and stiffness.
