Current concept
Technical and Biological Modifications for Enhanced Flexor Tendon Repair

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2009.12.044Get rights and content

Clinical outcomes after intrasynovial flexor tendon repair have been substantially improved over the past 2 decades through advances in tendon suture techniques and postoperative rehabilitation methods. Nevertheless, complications such as repair site elongation (i.e., gap formation) and rupture continue to occur frequently. Experimental studies have shown that repair site strength fails to increase in the first 3 weeks after tendon suture. After 3 weeks, the strength and rigidity of the repair site improve significantly, a process that continues for several months. Formation of a repair site gap during the early rehabilitation period has been shown to considerably delay the accrual of repair site strength over time. Thus, it is of prime importance that the method of tendon suture achieves and maintains a stiff and strong repair site during the early healing interval by maintaining close approximation of the tendon stumps and by stimulating, where possible, the intrinsic repair response. In this review, we describe recent efforts to enhance the integrity of the immature repair site. We focus on 2 major areas of advancement: surgical technique modifications and manipulation of the biologic and biochemical environment.

Section snippets

Number of core suture strands

Increasing the number of suture strands crossing the repair site increases strength, stiffness, and resistance to gap formation.1, 2 Early methods of repair with 2 core suture strands (e.g., Kessler, Bunnell, Tajima methods, etc.) coupled with postoperative immobilization led to a decrease in ultimate strength during the first 3 weeks after tendon suture.3 Although subsequent studies showed that the decrease in strength could be partially obviated by early motion exercise, the strength of the

Biologic Modifications for Enhanced Flexor Tendon Repair

Although surgeons have achieved substantial gains in tendon repair outcomes by modifying surgical technique, a considerable rate of complications still remains (e.g., repair-site gapping, suture pullout, tendon rupture, and adhesion formation). Flexor tendon healing relies on intrinsic tendon fibroblast activity arising from the epitenon and the endotenon and on an extrinsic inflammatory response originating from the tendon sheath. This intrinsic and extrinsic cellular response, while assisting

References (31)

Cited by (45)

  • Biological augmentation of flexor tendon repair: A challenging cellular landscape

    2016, Journal of Hand Surgery
    Citation Excerpt :

    Thus, the mechanism of injury, especially in dealing with zone II injuries, can influence outcomes and mechanisms and strategy for repair. Whereas recent improvements in surgical technique, suture patterns, and rehabilitation have dramatically improved outcomes of primary flexor tendon repairs,5,6 unsatisfactory outcomes are still often observed; up to 30% to 40% of primary flexor tendon repairs result in adhesion formation sufficient to limit digital range of motion.7 As such, there is an unmet need to minimize adhesions and promote tendon gliding, with biological intervention representing a potentially practical approach.

  • Flexor Tendon Injury, Repair and Rehabilitation

    2015, Orthopedic Clinics of North America
  • Evaluation of the ability of xanthan gum/gellan gum/hyaluronan hydrogel membranes to prevent the adhesion of postrepaired tendons

    2014, Carbohydrate Polymers
    Citation Excerpt :

    By performing a sharp dissection, the Achilles tendon was exposed and transected at its midpoint. The transected tendon was repaired using a modified Kessler technique (Kim et al., 2010) in which we used 5-0 Prolene sutures (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA), and then the tendon was wrapped with Seprafilm or XGH hydrogel membranes prepared using Formulations A, B, C, or D (Fig. 1). The 36 hind legs of the 18 rats were assigned randomly to six groups containing six legs each: the control group, Seprafilm group, and Groups A, B, C, and D.

View all citing articles on Scopus

This study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (AR033097 to R.H.G. and EB004347 to S.T.).

No benefits in any form have been received or will be received related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.

View full text