Cargando…

Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model

Objective  To analyze the stability of humerus supracondylar fracture fixation with Kirschner wires comparing intramedullary and lateral (Fi), and two parallel lateral wires (FL) fixation in experimental models, to define which configuration presents greater stability. Methods  A total of 72 synthet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nunes, Marcos Ceita, Posser, Ticiano Dozza, Israel, Charles Leonardo, Spinelli, Leandro de Freitas, Calieron, Luis Gustavo, Kim, Jung Ho
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda 2019
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6597430/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31363279
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1688756
_version_ 1783430582047342592
author Nunes, Marcos Ceita
Posser, Ticiano Dozza
Israel, Charles Leonardo
Spinelli, Leandro de Freitas
Calieron, Luis Gustavo
Kim, Jung Ho
author_facet Nunes, Marcos Ceita
Posser, Ticiano Dozza
Israel, Charles Leonardo
Spinelli, Leandro de Freitas
Calieron, Luis Gustavo
Kim, Jung Ho
author_sort Nunes, Marcos Ceita
collection PubMed
description Objective  To analyze the stability of humerus supracondylar fracture fixation with Kirschner wires comparing intramedullary and lateral (Fi), and two parallel lateral wires (FL) fixation in experimental models, to define which configuration presents greater stability. Methods  A total of 72 synthetic humeri were cross-sectioned to simulate the fracture. These bones were divided into two equal groups and the fractures were fixed with parallel Kirschner wires (FL) and with a lateral and intramedullary (Fi) wire. Then, the test specimens were subjected to stress load tests on a universal test machine, measured in Newtons (N). Each group was subdivided into varus load, valgus, extension, flexion, external rotation and internal rotation. An analysis of the data was performed comparing the subgroups of the FL group with their respective subgroups of the Fi group through the two-tailed t test. Results  The two-tailed t test showed that in 4 of the 6 evaluated conditions there was no significant statistical difference between the groups ( p  > 0.05). We have found a significant difference between the group with extension load with a mean of 19 N (FL group) and of 28.7 N (Fi group) ( p  = 0.004), and also between the groups with flexural load with the mean of the forces recorded in the FL group of 17.1 N and of 22.9 N in the Fi group ( p  = 0.01). Conclusion  Fixation with one intramedullary wire and one lateral wire, considering loads in extension and flexion, presents greater stability when compared to a fixation with two lateral wires, suggesting similar clinical results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6597430
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65974302019-07-29 Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model Nunes, Marcos Ceita Posser, Ticiano Dozza Israel, Charles Leonardo Spinelli, Leandro de Freitas Calieron, Luis Gustavo Kim, Jung Ho Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) Objective  To analyze the stability of humerus supracondylar fracture fixation with Kirschner wires comparing intramedullary and lateral (Fi), and two parallel lateral wires (FL) fixation in experimental models, to define which configuration presents greater stability. Methods  A total of 72 synthetic humeri were cross-sectioned to simulate the fracture. These bones were divided into two equal groups and the fractures were fixed with parallel Kirschner wires (FL) and with a lateral and intramedullary (Fi) wire. Then, the test specimens were subjected to stress load tests on a universal test machine, measured in Newtons (N). Each group was subdivided into varus load, valgus, extension, flexion, external rotation and internal rotation. An analysis of the data was performed comparing the subgroups of the FL group with their respective subgroups of the Fi group through the two-tailed t test. Results  The two-tailed t test showed that in 4 of the 6 evaluated conditions there was no significant statistical difference between the groups ( p  > 0.05). We have found a significant difference between the group with extension load with a mean of 19 N (FL group) and of 28.7 N (Fi group) ( p  = 0.004), and also between the groups with flexural load with the mean of the forces recorded in the FL group of 17.1 N and of 22.9 N in the Fi group ( p  = 0.01). Conclusion  Fixation with one intramedullary wire and one lateral wire, considering loads in extension and flexion, presents greater stability when compared to a fixation with two lateral wires, suggesting similar clinical results. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda 2019-05 2019-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6597430/ /pubmed/31363279 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1688756 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Nunes, Marcos Ceita
Posser, Ticiano Dozza
Israel, Charles Leonardo
Spinelli, Leandro de Freitas
Calieron, Luis Gustavo
Kim, Jung Ho
Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_full Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_fullStr Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_short Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_sort biomechanical analysis of two types of humerus supracondylar fracture fixation in anatomical model
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6597430/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31363279
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1688756
work_keys_str_mv AT nunesmarcosceita biomechanicalanalysisoftwotypesofhumerussupracondylarfracturefixationinanatomicalmodel
AT posserticianodozza biomechanicalanalysisoftwotypesofhumerussupracondylarfracturefixationinanatomicalmodel
AT israelcharlesleonardo biomechanicalanalysisoftwotypesofhumerussupracondylarfracturefixationinanatomicalmodel
AT spinellileandrodefreitas biomechanicalanalysisoftwotypesofhumerussupracondylarfracturefixationinanatomicalmodel
AT calieronluisgustavo biomechanicalanalysisoftwotypesofhumerussupracondylarfracturefixationinanatomicalmodel
AT kimjungho biomechanicalanalysisoftwotypesofhumerussupracondylarfracturefixationinanatomicalmodel