Biomechanical Evaluation of 4 Suture Techniques for Hip Capsular Closure. Issue 6 (21st June 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Murata, Yoichi; Fukase, Naomasa; Brady, Alex W.; Douglass, Brenton W.; Bryniarski, Anna R.; Dornan, Grant J.; Utsunomiya, Hajime; Uchida, Soshi; Philippon, Marc J.
• Is Part Of: Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine. Volume 10:Issue 6(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-06-21
• Subjects: hip capsule closure -- shoelace suture -- double shoelace suture -- Quebec City slider -- biomechanical study -- hip arthroscopy -- hip range of motion -- hip distraction -- iliofemoral ligament; Sports medicine -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; Arthroscopy -- Periodicals; Arthroplasty -- Periodicals; Knee -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 616.7
• DOI: 10.1177/23259671221089946
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2325-9671

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.