Cargando…
Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of a non-locking plate applied to the anteromedial surface of the proximal humerus on loads at the implant-bone interface of non-locking and locking lateral plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures with a medial gap. METHODS: Twenty...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6667157/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31361778 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220523 |
_version_ | 1783440007960199168 |
---|---|
author | di Tullio, Paulo Ottoni Giordano, Vincenzo Souto, Eder Assed, Hugo Chequer, João Paulo Belangero, William Mariolani, José Ricardo L. Koch, Hilton A. |
author_facet | di Tullio, Paulo Ottoni Giordano, Vincenzo Souto, Eder Assed, Hugo Chequer, João Paulo Belangero, William Mariolani, José Ricardo L. Koch, Hilton A. |
author_sort | di Tullio, Paulo Ottoni |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of a non-locking plate applied to the anteromedial surface of the proximal humerus on loads at the implant-bone interface of non-locking and locking lateral plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures with a medial gap. METHODS: Twenty synthetic humeri models were used. In fifteen, the proximal portion of the humerus was osteotomized to create a two-part surgical neck fracture, with a 10-mm medial gap and a 5-mm lateral gap; five models were controls. In the osteotomized humeri, five models were stabilized with a locking lateral plate (group L), five with a locking lateral plate and an anteromedial non-locking plate (group L+T), and five with a non-locking lateral plate and a non-locking anteromedial plate (group T+T). All humeri were tested under axial loading until catastrophic failure, which was characterized as complete closure of the medial gap. Stiffness was calculated using force vs. displacement curves. The data were analyzed via descriptive and inferential studies, at a 5% significance level. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were seen among all the constructions. The combination of a lateral locking plate with an anteromedial non-locking plate (group L+T) was the stiffest construction, while the combination of a non-locking lateral plate with a non-locking anteromedial plate (group T+T) was the least stiff, even in comparison with a single locking lateral plate (p = 0.01). When the two groups which utilized a lateral locking plate (groups L+T and L) were compared, the group with additional anteromedial support demonstrated greater stiffness (p = 0.03), and stiffness values for the control group comprised of intact humeri models were even higher (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Combining a lateral locking plate with a non-locking anteromedial plate provides a stiffer construction for fixation of unstable two-part proximal humerus fractures with a medial gap. Mechanical benefits of medial support with a second non-locking antero-medial plate seems to be related with better construct stability in terms of strength and fatigue, potentially reducing the risk of varus collapse of the humerus head and fracture healing disturbances. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6667157 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66671572019-08-07 Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support di Tullio, Paulo Ottoni Giordano, Vincenzo Souto, Eder Assed, Hugo Chequer, João Paulo Belangero, William Mariolani, José Ricardo L. Koch, Hilton A. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of a non-locking plate applied to the anteromedial surface of the proximal humerus on loads at the implant-bone interface of non-locking and locking lateral plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures with a medial gap. METHODS: Twenty synthetic humeri models were used. In fifteen, the proximal portion of the humerus was osteotomized to create a two-part surgical neck fracture, with a 10-mm medial gap and a 5-mm lateral gap; five models were controls. In the osteotomized humeri, five models were stabilized with a locking lateral plate (group L), five with a locking lateral plate and an anteromedial non-locking plate (group L+T), and five with a non-locking lateral plate and a non-locking anteromedial plate (group T+T). All humeri were tested under axial loading until catastrophic failure, which was characterized as complete closure of the medial gap. Stiffness was calculated using force vs. displacement curves. The data were analyzed via descriptive and inferential studies, at a 5% significance level. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were seen among all the constructions. The combination of a lateral locking plate with an anteromedial non-locking plate (group L+T) was the stiffest construction, while the combination of a non-locking lateral plate with a non-locking anteromedial plate (group T+T) was the least stiff, even in comparison with a single locking lateral plate (p = 0.01). When the two groups which utilized a lateral locking plate (groups L+T and L) were compared, the group with additional anteromedial support demonstrated greater stiffness (p = 0.03), and stiffness values for the control group comprised of intact humeri models were even higher (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Combining a lateral locking plate with a non-locking anteromedial plate provides a stiffer construction for fixation of unstable two-part proximal humerus fractures with a medial gap. Mechanical benefits of medial support with a second non-locking antero-medial plate seems to be related with better construct stability in terms of strength and fatigue, potentially reducing the risk of varus collapse of the humerus head and fracture healing disturbances. Public Library of Science 2019-07-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6667157/ /pubmed/31361778 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220523 Text en © 2019 di Tullio et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article di Tullio, Paulo Ottoni Giordano, Vincenzo Souto, Eder Assed, Hugo Chequer, João Paulo Belangero, William Mariolani, José Ricardo L. Koch, Hilton A. Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support |
title | Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support |
title_full | Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support |
title_fullStr | Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support |
title_full_unstemmed | Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support |
title_short | Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support |
title_sort | biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6667157/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31361778 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220523 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ditulliopauloottoni biomechanicalbehaviorofthreetypesoffixationinthetwopartproximalhumerusfracturewithoutmedialcorticalsupport AT giordanovincenzo biomechanicalbehaviorofthreetypesoffixationinthetwopartproximalhumerusfracturewithoutmedialcorticalsupport AT soutoeder biomechanicalbehaviorofthreetypesoffixationinthetwopartproximalhumerusfracturewithoutmedialcorticalsupport AT assedhugo biomechanicalbehaviorofthreetypesoffixationinthetwopartproximalhumerusfracturewithoutmedialcorticalsupport AT chequerjoaopaulo biomechanicalbehaviorofthreetypesoffixationinthetwopartproximalhumerusfracturewithoutmedialcorticalsupport AT belangerowilliam biomechanicalbehaviorofthreetypesoffixationinthetwopartproximalhumerusfracturewithoutmedialcorticalsupport AT mariolanijosericardol biomechanicalbehaviorofthreetypesoffixationinthetwopartproximalhumerusfracturewithoutmedialcorticalsupport AT kochhiltona biomechanicalbehaviorofthreetypesoffixationinthetwopartproximalhumerusfracturewithoutmedialcorticalsupport |