Cargando…

Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems

INTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic fractures of the femur are an increasing problem in today's trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Owing to the hip stem, implant anchorage is very difficult in the proximal femur. This study compares two plate systems regarding their biomechanical properties and the handl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wähnert, Dirk, Müller, Marcus, Tiedemann, Hendrik, Märdian, Sven, Raschke, Michael J., Kösters, Clemens
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Chinese Speaking Orthopaedic Society 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7548384/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33101965
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jot.2020.01.005
_version_ 1783592604048293888
author Wähnert, Dirk
Müller, Marcus
Tiedemann, Hendrik
Märdian, Sven
Raschke, Michael J.
Kösters, Clemens
author_facet Wähnert, Dirk
Müller, Marcus
Tiedemann, Hendrik
Märdian, Sven
Raschke, Michael J.
Kösters, Clemens
author_sort Wähnert, Dirk
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic fractures of the femur are an increasing problem in today's trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Owing to the hip stem, implant anchorage is very difficult in the proximal femur. This study compares two plate systems regarding their biomechanical properties and the handling in periprosthetic fracture fixation of the proximal femur. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using eight pairs of fresh, frozen human proximal femora the Locking Compression Plate/Locking Attachment Plate construct (LCP/LAP) (group I, DePuy Synthes) was compared to the new LOQTEQ® periprosthetic distal lateral femur plate (group II, AAP Implantate AG). After implantation of press fit femoral hip stems a Vancouver B1 fracture model was used. Biomechanical testing was performed by cyclic axial loading with a constant increment of 0.1 N/cycle starting from 750 N axial loading. Every 250 cycles an a.p. x-ray was done to evaluate failure. RESULTS: The Group II showed significant higher axial stiffness (+42%) compared with Group I. In addition, Group II withstood significantly more load-cycles until failure (20%). The mode of catastrophic failure was plate breakage in Group II, whereas, in Group I, all plates showed an early bending followed by plate breakage. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Both plate systems enable screw placement around hip stems. The hinge plate showed superior biomechanical results compared with the locking compression plate/locking attachment plate construct. Furthermore, the hinge plate offers variable hinges and variable angel locking making bicortical screw placement around hip stems more comfortable and safe. THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE: The results of this study can be directly transferred to patient care. With the innovative hinge plate, the surgeon has a biomechanically superior implant, which also offers improved options for screw placement compared to a standard locking plate.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7548384
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Chinese Speaking Orthopaedic Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75483842020-10-22 Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems Wähnert, Dirk Müller, Marcus Tiedemann, Hendrik Märdian, Sven Raschke, Michael J. Kösters, Clemens J Orthop Translat Original Article INTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic fractures of the femur are an increasing problem in today's trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Owing to the hip stem, implant anchorage is very difficult in the proximal femur. This study compares two plate systems regarding their biomechanical properties and the handling in periprosthetic fracture fixation of the proximal femur. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using eight pairs of fresh, frozen human proximal femora the Locking Compression Plate/Locking Attachment Plate construct (LCP/LAP) (group I, DePuy Synthes) was compared to the new LOQTEQ® periprosthetic distal lateral femur plate (group II, AAP Implantate AG). After implantation of press fit femoral hip stems a Vancouver B1 fracture model was used. Biomechanical testing was performed by cyclic axial loading with a constant increment of 0.1 N/cycle starting from 750 N axial loading. Every 250 cycles an a.p. x-ray was done to evaluate failure. RESULTS: The Group II showed significant higher axial stiffness (+42%) compared with Group I. In addition, Group II withstood significantly more load-cycles until failure (20%). The mode of catastrophic failure was plate breakage in Group II, whereas, in Group I, all plates showed an early bending followed by plate breakage. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Both plate systems enable screw placement around hip stems. The hinge plate showed superior biomechanical results compared with the locking compression plate/locking attachment plate construct. Furthermore, the hinge plate offers variable hinges and variable angel locking making bicortical screw placement around hip stems more comfortable and safe. THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE: The results of this study can be directly transferred to patient care. With the innovative hinge plate, the surgeon has a biomechanically superior implant, which also offers improved options for screw placement compared to a standard locking plate. Chinese Speaking Orthopaedic Society 2020-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7548384/ /pubmed/33101965 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jot.2020.01.005 Text en © 2020 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Wähnert, Dirk
Müller, Marcus
Tiedemann, Hendrik
Märdian, Sven
Raschke, Michael J.
Kösters, Clemens
Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems
title Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems
title_full Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems
title_fullStr Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems
title_full_unstemmed Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems
title_short Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems
title_sort periprosthetic fracture fixation in vancouver b1 femoral shaft fractures: a biomechanical study comparing two plate systems
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7548384/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33101965
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jot.2020.01.005
work_keys_str_mv AT wahnertdirk periprostheticfracturefixationinvancouverb1femoralshaftfracturesabiomechanicalstudycomparingtwoplatesystems
AT mullermarcus periprostheticfracturefixationinvancouverb1femoralshaftfracturesabiomechanicalstudycomparingtwoplatesystems
AT tiedemannhendrik periprostheticfracturefixationinvancouverb1femoralshaftfracturesabiomechanicalstudycomparingtwoplatesystems
AT mardiansven periprostheticfracturefixationinvancouverb1femoralshaftfracturesabiomechanicalstudycomparingtwoplatesystems
AT raschkemichaelj periprostheticfracturefixationinvancouverb1femoralshaftfracturesabiomechanicalstudycomparingtwoplatesystems
AT kostersclemens periprostheticfracturefixationinvancouverb1femoralshaftfracturesabiomechanicalstudycomparingtwoplatesystems