Biomechanical Comparison of Fixation Methods for Posterior Wall Fractures of the Acetabulum: Conventional Reconstruction Plate vs. Spring Plate vs. Variable Angle Locking Compression Plate

被引:0
|
作者
Chung, Hoejeong [1 ]
Sohn, Hoon-Sang [1 ]
Oh, Jong-Keon [2 ]
Lee, Sangho [1 ]
Kim, Doosup [1 ]
机构
[1] Yonsei Univ, Wonju Severance Christian Hosp, Wonju Coll Med, Dept Orthoped Surg, 20 Ilsan Ro, Wonju 26426, South Korea
[2] Korea Univ, Korea Univ Med, Guro Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Surg, 148 Gurodong Ro, Seoul 08308, South Korea
来源
MEDICINA-LITHUANIA | 2024年 / 60卷 / 06期
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
biomechanics; acetabulum; posterior wall fracture; variable angle plate; INTERNAL-FIXATION; HIP;
D O I
10.3390/medicina60060882
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background and Objectives: Acetabular fractures, though infrequent, present considerable challenges in treatment due to their association with high-energy trauma and poor prognoses. Posterior wall fractures, the most common type among them, typically have a more favorable prognosis compared to other types. Anatomical reduction and stable fixation of the posterior wall are crucial for optimal treatment outcomes. This study aimed to biomechanically compare three commonly used fixation methods for posterior wall fractures of the acetabulum-a conventional reconstruction plate, a spring plate, and a 2.7 mm variable angle locking compression plate (VA-LCP). Materials and Methods: The study utilized 6 fresh-frozen cadavers, yielding 12 hemipelvises free from prior trauma or surgery. Three fixation methods were compared using a simple acetabulum posterior wall fracture model. Fixation was performed by an orthopedic specialist, with prebending of plates to minimize errors. Hemipelvises were subjected to quasi-static and cyclic loading tests, measuring fracture gap, stiffness, and displacement under load. Results: It showed no significant differences in fracture gap among the three fixation methods under cyclic loading conditions simulating walking. However, the conventional reconstruction plate exhibited a greater stiffness compared to the spring and variable angle plates. Fatigue analysis revealed no significant differences among the plates, indicating a similar stability throughout cyclic loading. Despite differences in stiffness, all three fixation methods demonstrated adequate stability under loading conditions. Conclusions: While the conventional reconstruction plate demonstrated a superior stiffness, all three fixation methods provided sufficient stability under cyclic loading conditions similar to walking. This suggests that postoperative limitations are unlikely with any of the three methods, provided excessive activities are avoided. Furthermore, the variable angle plate-like the spring plate-offers an appropriate stability for fragment-specific fixation, supporting its use in surgical applications. These findings contribute to understanding the biomechanical performance of different fixation methods for acetabular fractures, facilitating improved surgical outcomes in challenging cases.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Biomechanical Comparison of Hook Plate vs Headless Compression Screw Fixation of Large Fifth Metatarsal Base Avulsion Fractures
    Bean, Bryan A.
    Smyth, Niall A.
    Abbasi, Pooyan
    Parks, Brent G.
    Hembree, Walter C.
    FOOT & ANKLE INTERNATIONAL, 2021, 42 (01) : 89 - 95
  • [22] Treatment of distal intraarticular tibial fractures: A biomechanical evaluation of intramedullary nailing vs. angle-stable plate osteosynthesis
    Kuhn, Sebastian
    Greenfield, Julia
    Arand, Charlotte
    Jarmolaew, Andrey
    Appelmann, Philipp
    Mehler, Dorothea
    Rommens, Pol M.
    INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2015, 46 : S99 - S103
  • [23] Biomechanical comparison of monocortical and bicortical plate fixation for rib fractures in a cadaveric model using a locking plate system
    Choke, Abby
    Wong, Yoke Rung
    Joethy, Janna-Vale
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2019, 11 (12) : 4966 - 4971
  • [24] Comparison of lateral locking plate and antiglide plate for fixation of distal fibular fractures in osteoporotic bone: A biomechanical study
    Minihane, Keith P.
    Lee, Chris
    Ahn, Chulhyun
    Zhang, Li-Qun
    Merk, Bradley R.
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2006, 20 (08) : 562 - 566
  • [25] An In Vitro Biomechanical Comparison of a 5.5 mm Locking Compression Plate Fixation with a 4.5 mm Locking Compression Plate Fixation of Osteotomized Equine Third Metacarpal Bones
    Sod, Gary A.
    Riggs, Laura M.
    Mitchell, Colin F.
    Martin, George S.
    Gill, Marjorie S.
    VETERINARY SURGERY, 2010, 39 (05) : 581 - 587
  • [26] Comparison of different locking plate fixation methods in lateral malleolus fractures
    Bilgetekin, Yenel Gurkan
    Catma, Mehmet Faruk
    Ozturk, Alper
    Unlu, Serhan
    Ersan, Onder
    FOOT AND ANKLE SURGERY, 2019, 25 (03) : 366 - 370
  • [27] Single column plate plus other column lag screw fixation vs. both column plate fixation for anterior column with posterior hemitransverse acetabular fractures - a biomechanical analysis using different loading protocols
    Quang, Huy Le
    Schmoelz, Werner
    Lindtner, Richard A.
    Dammerer, Dietmar
    Schwendinger, Peter
    Krappinger, Dietmar
    INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2021, 52 (04): : 699 - 704
  • [28] Comparison of different locking plate fixation methods in distal tibia fractures
    Krzysztof Piątkowski
    Piotr Piekarczyk
    Krzysztof Kwiatkowski
    Mateusz Przybycień
    Bartłomiej Chwedczuk
    International Orthopaedics, 2015, 39 : 2245 - 2251
  • [29] Comparison of different locking plate fixation methods in distal tibia fractures
    Piatkowski, Krzysztof
    Piekarczyk, Piotr
    Kwiatkowski, Krzysztof
    Przybycien, Mateusz
    Chwedczuk, Bartlomiej
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2015, 39 (11) : 2245 - 2251
  • [30] Locked vs. unlocked plate osteosynthesis of the proximal humerus -: A biomechanical study
    Seide, K.
    Triebe, J.
    Faschingbauer, M.
    Schulz, A. P.
    Pueschel, K.
    Mehrtens, G.
    Juergens, Ch.
    CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 2007, 22 (02) : 176 - 182