Cargando…
Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review
BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures are the third most common in the human body but their management remains controversial. Open reduction and internal fixation with plates is one of the leading modes of operative treatment for these fractures. The development of technologies and techniques for t...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5923007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29703261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-018-0479-3 |
_version_ | 1783318267394260992 |
---|---|
author | Jabran, Ali Peach, Chris Ren, Lei |
author_facet | Jabran, Ali Peach, Chris Ren, Lei |
author_sort | Jabran, Ali |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures are the third most common in the human body but their management remains controversial. Open reduction and internal fixation with plates is one of the leading modes of operative treatment for these fractures. The development of technologies and techniques for these plates, during the recent decades, promise a bright future for their clinical use. A comprehensive review of in vitro biomechanical studies is needed for the comparison of plates’ mechanical performance and the testing methodologies. This will not only guide clinicians with plate selection but also with the design of future in vitro biomechanical studies. This review was aimed to systematically categorise and review the in vitro biomechanical studies of these plates based on their protocols and discuss their results. The technologies and techniques investigated in these studies were categorised and compared to reach a census where possible. METHODS AND RESULTS: Web of Science and Scopus database search yielded 62 studies. Out of these, 51 performed axial loading, torsion, bending and/or combined bending and axial loading while 11 simulated complex glenohumeral movements by using tendons. Loading conditions and set-up, failure criteria and performance parameters, as well as results for each study, were reviewed. Only two studies tested four-part fracture model while the rest investigated two- and three-part fractures. In ten studies, synthetic humeri were tested instead of cadaveric ones. In addition to load–displacement data, three-dimensional motion analysis systems, digital image correlation and acoustic emission testing have been used for measurement. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, PHILOS was the most tested plate and locking plates demonstrated better mechanical performance than non-locking ones. Conflicting results have been published for their comparison with non-locking blade plates and polyaxial locking screws. Augmentation with cement [calcium phosphate or poly(methyl methacrylate)] or allografts (fibular and femoral head) was found to improve bone-plate constructs’ mechanical performance. Controversy still lies over the use of rigid and semi-rigid implants and the insertion of inferomedial screws for calcar region support. This review will guide the design of in vitro and in silico biomechanical tests and also supplement the study of clinical literature. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12938-018-0479-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5923007 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59230072018-05-07 Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review Jabran, Ali Peach, Chris Ren, Lei Biomed Eng Online Review BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures are the third most common in the human body but their management remains controversial. Open reduction and internal fixation with plates is one of the leading modes of operative treatment for these fractures. The development of technologies and techniques for these plates, during the recent decades, promise a bright future for their clinical use. A comprehensive review of in vitro biomechanical studies is needed for the comparison of plates’ mechanical performance and the testing methodologies. This will not only guide clinicians with plate selection but also with the design of future in vitro biomechanical studies. This review was aimed to systematically categorise and review the in vitro biomechanical studies of these plates based on their protocols and discuss their results. The technologies and techniques investigated in these studies were categorised and compared to reach a census where possible. METHODS AND RESULTS: Web of Science and Scopus database search yielded 62 studies. Out of these, 51 performed axial loading, torsion, bending and/or combined bending and axial loading while 11 simulated complex glenohumeral movements by using tendons. Loading conditions and set-up, failure criteria and performance parameters, as well as results for each study, were reviewed. Only two studies tested four-part fracture model while the rest investigated two- and three-part fractures. In ten studies, synthetic humeri were tested instead of cadaveric ones. In addition to load–displacement data, three-dimensional motion analysis systems, digital image correlation and acoustic emission testing have been used for measurement. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, PHILOS was the most tested plate and locking plates demonstrated better mechanical performance than non-locking ones. Conflicting results have been published for their comparison with non-locking blade plates and polyaxial locking screws. Augmentation with cement [calcium phosphate or poly(methyl methacrylate)] or allografts (fibular and femoral head) was found to improve bone-plate constructs’ mechanical performance. Controversy still lies over the use of rigid and semi-rigid implants and the insertion of inferomedial screws for calcar region support. This review will guide the design of in vitro and in silico biomechanical tests and also supplement the study of clinical literature. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12938-018-0479-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC5923007/ /pubmed/29703261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-018-0479-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Review Jabran, Ali Peach, Chris Ren, Lei Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review |
title | Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review |
title_full | Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review |
title_fullStr | Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review |
title_full_unstemmed | Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review |
title_short | Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review |
title_sort | biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5923007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29703261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-018-0479-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jabranali biomechanicalanalysisofplatesystemsforproximalhumerusfracturesasystematicliteraturereview AT peachchris biomechanicalanalysisofplatesystemsforproximalhumerusfracturesasystematicliteraturereview AT renlei biomechanicalanalysisofplatesystemsforproximalhumerusfracturesasystematicliteraturereview |