Thermal Microdebridement Does Not Affect the Time Zero Biomechanical Properties of Human Patellar Tendons

Background: Thermal microdebridement for the treatment of chronic tendinopathy has recently been introduced. The effect of thermal microdebridement on the biomechanical properties of human tendons, however, remains unknown. Hypothesis: Thermal microdebridement does not affect the biomechanical prope...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American journal of sports medicine 2004-12, Vol.32 (8), p.1946-1952
Main Authors: Silver, William P., Creighton, R. Alexander, Triantafillopoulos, Ioannis K., Devkota, Aaditya C., Weinhold, Paul S., Karas, Spero G.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Biological and medical sciences
Biomechanical Phenomena
Cadaver
Care and treatment
Catheter Ablation
Causes of
Debridement - methods
Diseases of the osteoarticular system
Female
Humans
Juxtaarticular diseases. Extraarticular rhumatism
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Patellar tendon
Patient care
Sports injuries
Tendinitis
Tendons - physiology
Tendons - surgery
Tensile Strength - physiology
Weight-Bearing - physiology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: Thermal microdebridement for the treatment of chronic tendinopathy has recently been introduced. The effect of thermal microdebridement on the biomechanical properties of human tendons, however, remains unknown. Hypothesis: Thermal microdebridement does not affect the biomechanical properties of human patellar tendons in a cadaveric model at the time of initial treatment. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: The central 15 mm of 12 matched, human (mean age, 71 years; 8 male, 4 female), fresh-frozen patellar tendons was divided into 3 equal 5-mm specimens. The treatment group (n = 12) underwent thermal microdebridement with a radiofrequency probe. A sham treatment group (n = 12) underwent insertion of a deactivated probe. The control group (n = 12) underwent no treatment. After treatment, each specimen was tested to failure in a servo-hydraulic materials testing machine at an elongation rate of 3 mm/s. One-way repeated measures analysis of variance was used to determine differences between groups. Results: No significant difference in ultimate stress at failure, elastic modulus, strain energy density, or strain at maximum load was found between the groups. The ultimate stress at failure for the treatment, sham, and control groups was 61.0, 66.7, and 63.0 MPa, respectively ( P = .653), and the strain at maximum load was 0.12, 0.11, and 0.09, respectively ( P = .279). Conclusions: Thermal microdebridement does not affect the biomechanical properties of cadaveric human patellar tendons at the time of initial treatment. Clinical Relevance: It may be safe to proceed with aggressive rehabilitation after thermal microdebridement of the patellar tendon. However, the results in this cadaveric model should be interpreted with caution. Additional studies using an in vivo model will be required to completely assess the effects of thermal microdebridement on the biomechanical properties of human patellar tendons. Keywords: tendinopathy debridement coblation tendon radiofrequency
ISSN:0363-5465
1552-3365
DOI:10.1177/0363546504264583