The V-Shaped Distal Triceps Tendon Repair: A Comparative Biomechanical Analysis

Abstract

Background: Restoring footprint anatomy, minimizing gap formation, and maximizing the strength of distal triceps tendon repairs are essential factors for a successful healing process and return to sport. Hypothesis: The novel V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique with unicortical button fixation closely restores footprint anatomy, provides minimal gap formation and high ultimate failure load, and minimizes iatrogenic fracture risk in acute/subacute distal triceps tendon tears. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Twenty-four cadaveric elbows (mean ± SD age, 66 ± 5 years) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 repair groups: the transosseous cruciate repair technique (gold standard), the knotless suture-bridge repair technique, and the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique. Anatomic measurements of the central triceps tendon footprint were obtained in all specimens with a 3-dimensional digitizer before and after the repair. Cyclic loading was performed for a total of 1500 cycles at a rate of 0.25 Hz, pulling in the direction of the triceps. Displacements were measured on the medial and lateral tendon sites with 2 differential variable reluctance transducers. Load to failure and construct failure mode were recorded. Results: The mean triceps bony insertion area was 399.05 ± 81.23 mm2. The transosseous cruciate repair technique restored 36.6% ± 16.8% of the native tendon insertion area, which was significantly different when compared with the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (85.2% ± 14.8%, P = .001) and the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (88.9% ± 14.8%, P = .002). Mean displacement showed no significant difference between the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (medial side, 0.75 ± 0.56 mm; lateral side, 0.99 ± 0.59 mm) and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (1.61 ± 0.97 mm and 1.29 ± 0.8 mm) but significance between the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the transosseous cruciate repair technique (4.91 ± 1.12 mm and 5.78 ± 0.9 mm, P < .001). Mean peak failure load of the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (732.1 ± 156.0 N) was significantly higher than that of the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (505.4 ± 173.9 N, P = .011) and the transosseous cruciate repair technique (281.1 ± 74.8 N, P < .001). Mechanism of failure differed among the 3 repairs, with the only olecranon fracture occurring in the knotless suture-bridge repair technique at the level of the lateral row suture anchors. Conclusion: At time zero, the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique both provided anatomic footprint coverage. Ultimate load to failure was highest for the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique, while gap formation was different only in comparison with the transosseous cruciate repair technique. Clinical Relevance: The V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique provides an alternative procedure to other established repairs for acute/subacute distal triceps tendon ruptures. The reduced repair site motion of the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique at the time of surgery may allow a more aggressive rehabilitation program in the early postoperative period.