Republication of “Peroneus Brevis Tenodesis: Side-to-Side or Weave?”

Background: Inversion ankle injuries are extremely common, sometimes causing injury to the peroneus brevis tendon. If more than 50% of the tendon is injured, it oftentimes requires tenodesis to the adjacent peroneus longus tendon. Both Pulvertaft (PT) and side-to-side (SS) techniques have been used...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Cory F. Janney MD, MC, USN, Michael Iloanya BA, Randal Morris BS, Vinod K. Panchbhavi MD, FACS
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2023-08-01
Series:Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/24730114231195333
_version_ 1827856641732640768
author Cory F. Janney MD, MC, USN
Michael Iloanya BA
Randal Morris BS
Vinod K. Panchbhavi MD, FACS
author_facet Cory F. Janney MD, MC, USN
Michael Iloanya BA
Randal Morris BS
Vinod K. Panchbhavi MD, FACS
author_sort Cory F. Janney MD, MC, USN
collection DOAJ
description Background: Inversion ankle injuries are extremely common, sometimes causing injury to the peroneus brevis tendon. If more than 50% of the tendon is injured, it oftentimes requires tenodesis to the adjacent peroneus longus tendon. Both Pulvertaft (PT) and side-to-side (SS) techniques have been used for joining the 2 tendons. The purpose of this study was to compare the strength and stiffness of these 2 techniques. Methods: Five matched pairs of cadaver ankle specimens were randomized to receive either an SS or PT tenodesis of the peroneus brevis to longus tendons. Following the tenodesis, the specimens were tested for failure load, displacement, energy absorbed at failure, and peak load. Stiffness was also calculated. Paired t tests were performed to detect differences between the 2 conditions. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the SS and PT tenodesis for any of the metrics measured. For stiffness, the techniques were very similar (SS = 10.14 [4.35], PT = 12.85 [1.72]). Conclusion: There is no difference in failure load, displacement, energy absorbed at failure, peak load or stiffness between the PT and SS techniques for peroneal tenodesis. Level of Evidence: Level V, cadaver study.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T12:28:42Z
format Article
id doaj.art-6b93d707746b49b2831d11ea11934041
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2473-0114
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T12:28:42Z
publishDate 2023-08-01
publisher SAGE Publishing
record_format Article
series Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
spelling doaj.art-6b93d707746b49b2831d11ea119340412023-08-29T18:36:36ZengSAGE PublishingFoot & Ankle Orthopaedics2473-01142023-08-01810.1177/24730114231195333Republication of “Peroneus Brevis Tenodesis: Side-to-Side or Weave?”Cory F. Janney MD, MC, USN0Michael Iloanya BA1Randal Morris BS2Vinod K. Panchbhavi MD, FACS3Naval Medical Center San Diego, CA, USADepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USADepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USADepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USABackground: Inversion ankle injuries are extremely common, sometimes causing injury to the peroneus brevis tendon. If more than 50% of the tendon is injured, it oftentimes requires tenodesis to the adjacent peroneus longus tendon. Both Pulvertaft (PT) and side-to-side (SS) techniques have been used for joining the 2 tendons. The purpose of this study was to compare the strength and stiffness of these 2 techniques. Methods: Five matched pairs of cadaver ankle specimens were randomized to receive either an SS or PT tenodesis of the peroneus brevis to longus tendons. Following the tenodesis, the specimens were tested for failure load, displacement, energy absorbed at failure, and peak load. Stiffness was also calculated. Paired t tests were performed to detect differences between the 2 conditions. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the SS and PT tenodesis for any of the metrics measured. For stiffness, the techniques were very similar (SS = 10.14 [4.35], PT = 12.85 [1.72]). Conclusion: There is no difference in failure load, displacement, energy absorbed at failure, peak load or stiffness between the PT and SS techniques for peroneal tenodesis. Level of Evidence: Level V, cadaver study.https://doi.org/10.1177/24730114231195333
spellingShingle Cory F. Janney MD, MC, USN
Michael Iloanya BA
Randal Morris BS
Vinod K. Panchbhavi MD, FACS
Republication of “Peroneus Brevis Tenodesis: Side-to-Side or Weave?”
Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
title Republication of “Peroneus Brevis Tenodesis: Side-to-Side or Weave?”
title_full Republication of “Peroneus Brevis Tenodesis: Side-to-Side or Weave?”
title_fullStr Republication of “Peroneus Brevis Tenodesis: Side-to-Side or Weave?”
title_full_unstemmed Republication of “Peroneus Brevis Tenodesis: Side-to-Side or Weave?”
title_short Republication of “Peroneus Brevis Tenodesis: Side-to-Side or Weave?”
title_sort republication of peroneus brevis tenodesis side to side or weave
url https://doi.org/10.1177/24730114231195333
work_keys_str_mv AT coryfjanneymdmcusn republicationofperoneusbrevistenodesissidetosideorweave
AT michaeliloanyaba republicationofperoneusbrevistenodesissidetosideorweave
AT randalmorrisbs republicationofperoneusbrevistenodesissidetosideorweave
AT vinodkpanchbhavimdfacs republicationofperoneusbrevistenodesissidetosideorweave