Litcius/Paper detail

Biomechanical Evaluation of 4 Suture Techniques for Hip Capsular Closure

Yoichi Murata, Naomasa Fukase, Alex W. Brady, Brenton W. Douglass, Anna Bryniarski, Grant J. Dornan, Hajime Utsunomiya, Soshi Uchida, Marc J. Philippon

2022Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine17 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

Background: The most reliable suture technique for capsular closure after a capsulotomy remains unknown. Purpose: To determine which suture technique best restores native stability after a 5-cm interportal capsulotomy. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten human cadaveric hip specimens were tested using a 6-degrees-of-freedom robotic arm in 7 states: intact, capsular laxity, 5-cm capsulotomy, standard suture, shoelace, double shoelace, and Quebec City slider (QCS). Rotational range of motion (ROM) was measured across 9 tests: flexion, extension, abduction, abduction at 45° of flexion, adduction, external rotation, internal rotation, anterior impingement, and log roll. Distraction (ie, femoral head translation [FHT]) was measured across a range of flexion and abduction angles. Results: When compared with the native state, the 5-cm capsulotomy state showed the largest laxity increases on all tests, specifically in external rotation ROM (+13.4°), extension ROM (+11.5°), and distraction FHT (+4.5 mm) ( P < .001 for all). The standard suture technique was not significantly different from the 5-cm capsulotomy on any test and demonstrated significantly more flexion ROM than the double shoelace suture (+1.41°; P = .049) and more extension ROM (+5.51°; P = .014) and external rotation ROM (+6.03°; P = .021) than the QCS. The standard suture also resulted in significantly higher distraction FHT as compared with the shoelace suture (+1.0 mm; P = .005), double shoelace suture (+1.4 mm; P < .001), and QCS (+1.1 mm; P = .003). The shoelace, double shoelace, and QCS techniques significantly reduced hip laxity when compared with the 5-cm capsulotomy state, specifically in external rotation ROM (respectively, –8.1°, –7.8°, and –10.2°), extension ROM (–6.3°, –7.3°, and –8.1°), and distraction FHT (–1.8, –2.2, and –1.9 mm) ( P ≤ .003 for all). These 3 techniques restored native stability (no significant difference from intact) on some but not all tests, and no significant differences were observed among them on any test. Conclusion: Hip capsule closure with the standard suture technique did not prevent postoperative hip instability after a 5-cm capsulotomy, and 3 suture techniques were found to be preferable; however, none perfectly restored native stability at time zero. Clinical Relevance: The shoelace, double shoelace, and QCS suture techniques are recommended when closing the hip capsule.

Topics & Concepts

Cadaveric spasmCapsulotomyMedicineFibrous jointRange of motionOrthodonticsHip flexionSurgeryIntraocular lensHip disorders and treatmentsOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyShoulder Injury and Treatment
Biomechanical Evaluation of 4 Suture Techniques for Hip Capsular Closure | Litcius