Cargando…
Comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery
To guide the selection of osteosynthesis systems, this study compared the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems. SonicPins Rx and xG were subjected to pull-out tests. Additionally, 15 biodegradable (Inion CPS 2.0 and 2.5 mm; LactoSorb 2.0 mm; Macropore 2.0 mm; Po...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7584639/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33097757 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75299-9 |
_version_ | 1783599637426339840 |
---|---|
author | Gareb, Barzi Roossien, Charlotte C. van Bakelen, Nico B. Verkerke, Gijsbertus J. Vissink, Arjan Bos, Ruud R. M. van Minnen, Baucke |
author_facet | Gareb, Barzi Roossien, Charlotte C. van Bakelen, Nico B. Verkerke, Gijsbertus J. Vissink, Arjan Bos, Ruud R. M. van Minnen, Baucke |
author_sort | Gareb, Barzi |
collection | PubMed |
description | To guide the selection of osteosynthesis systems, this study compared the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems. SonicPins Rx and xG were subjected to pull-out tests. Additionally, 15 biodegradable (Inion CPS 2.0 and 2.5 mm; LactoSorb 2.0 mm; Macropore 2.0 mm; Polymax 2.0 mm; BioSorb FX 2.0 mm; ResorbX 2.1 mm; Osteotrans-MX 2.0 mm with plate thicknesses 1.0 and 1.4 mm; SonicWeld Rx(plate)/Rx(pins), xG(plate)/Rx(pins) and xG(plate)/xG(pins) 2.1 mm without and with tapping the burr hole) and six titanium (CrossDrive (2006), CrossDrive (2018), MaxDrive; all 1.5 and 2.0 mm) straight, four-hole osteosynthesis systems were evaluated. All systems were subjected to tensile, bending and torsion tests. Pull-out loads of the SonicPins were comparable (P = 0.423). Titanium systems’ tensile loads were higher than biodegradable systems (P < 0.001). CrossDrive (2018) and MaxDrive systems’ tensile and torsional stiffness were lower, accompanied with higher ductility, than corresponding CrossDrive (2006) systems (P < 0.001). Bending stiffness of 1.5 mm titanium systems was comparable to, and of the 2.0 mm systems higher than, all biodegradable systems (P < 0.001). Regarding biodegradable systems, Inion CPS 2.5 mm had highest tensile load and torsional stiffness, SonicWeld 2.1 mm highest tensile stiffness, and BioSorbFX 2.0 mm highest bending stiffness (P < 0.001). On the basis of the results of this study, the CrossDrive (2018) and MaxDrive 1.5 mm titanium systems are recommended for midface fractures (e.g., zygomatic or maxillary fractures) and osteotomies (e.g., Le Fort I osteotomy), and the CrossDrive (2018) and MaxDrive 2.0 mm titanium systems for mandibular fractures and osteotomies when a titanium osteosynthesis system is used. When there is an indication for a biodegradable osteosynthesis system, the SonicWeld 2.1 mm or BioSorbFX 2.0 mm are recommended for midface fractures and osteotomies, and the Inion CPS 2.5 mm biodegradable system for mandibular osteotomies and non-load bearing mandibular fractures, especially when high torsional forces are expected (e.g., mandibular symphysis fractures). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7584639 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75846392020-10-27 Comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery Gareb, Barzi Roossien, Charlotte C. van Bakelen, Nico B. Verkerke, Gijsbertus J. Vissink, Arjan Bos, Ruud R. M. van Minnen, Baucke Sci Rep Article To guide the selection of osteosynthesis systems, this study compared the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems. SonicPins Rx and xG were subjected to pull-out tests. Additionally, 15 biodegradable (Inion CPS 2.0 and 2.5 mm; LactoSorb 2.0 mm; Macropore 2.0 mm; Polymax 2.0 mm; BioSorb FX 2.0 mm; ResorbX 2.1 mm; Osteotrans-MX 2.0 mm with plate thicknesses 1.0 and 1.4 mm; SonicWeld Rx(plate)/Rx(pins), xG(plate)/Rx(pins) and xG(plate)/xG(pins) 2.1 mm without and with tapping the burr hole) and six titanium (CrossDrive (2006), CrossDrive (2018), MaxDrive; all 1.5 and 2.0 mm) straight, four-hole osteosynthesis systems were evaluated. All systems were subjected to tensile, bending and torsion tests. Pull-out loads of the SonicPins were comparable (P = 0.423). Titanium systems’ tensile loads were higher than biodegradable systems (P < 0.001). CrossDrive (2018) and MaxDrive systems’ tensile and torsional stiffness were lower, accompanied with higher ductility, than corresponding CrossDrive (2006) systems (P < 0.001). Bending stiffness of 1.5 mm titanium systems was comparable to, and of the 2.0 mm systems higher than, all biodegradable systems (P < 0.001). Regarding biodegradable systems, Inion CPS 2.5 mm had highest tensile load and torsional stiffness, SonicWeld 2.1 mm highest tensile stiffness, and BioSorbFX 2.0 mm highest bending stiffness (P < 0.001). On the basis of the results of this study, the CrossDrive (2018) and MaxDrive 1.5 mm titanium systems are recommended for midface fractures (e.g., zygomatic or maxillary fractures) and osteotomies (e.g., Le Fort I osteotomy), and the CrossDrive (2018) and MaxDrive 2.0 mm titanium systems for mandibular fractures and osteotomies when a titanium osteosynthesis system is used. When there is an indication for a biodegradable osteosynthesis system, the SonicWeld 2.1 mm or BioSorbFX 2.0 mm are recommended for midface fractures and osteotomies, and the Inion CPS 2.5 mm biodegradable system for mandibular osteotomies and non-load bearing mandibular fractures, especially when high torsional forces are expected (e.g., mandibular symphysis fractures). Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7584639/ /pubmed/33097757 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75299-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Gareb, Barzi Roossien, Charlotte C. van Bakelen, Nico B. Verkerke, Gijsbertus J. Vissink, Arjan Bos, Ruud R. M. van Minnen, Baucke Comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery |
title | Comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery |
title_full | Comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery |
title_fullStr | Comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery |
title_short | Comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery |
title_sort | comparison of the mechanical properties of biodegradable and titanium osteosynthesis systems used in oral and maxillofacial surgery |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7584639/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33097757 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75299-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT garebbarzi comparisonofthemechanicalpropertiesofbiodegradableandtitaniumosteosynthesissystemsusedinoralandmaxillofacialsurgery AT roossiencharlottec comparisonofthemechanicalpropertiesofbiodegradableandtitaniumosteosynthesissystemsusedinoralandmaxillofacialsurgery AT vanbakelennicob comparisonofthemechanicalpropertiesofbiodegradableandtitaniumosteosynthesissystemsusedinoralandmaxillofacialsurgery AT verkerkegijsbertusj comparisonofthemechanicalpropertiesofbiodegradableandtitaniumosteosynthesissystemsusedinoralandmaxillofacialsurgery AT vissinkarjan comparisonofthemechanicalpropertiesofbiodegradableandtitaniumosteosynthesissystemsusedinoralandmaxillofacialsurgery AT bosruudrm comparisonofthemechanicalpropertiesofbiodegradableandtitaniumosteosynthesissystemsusedinoralandmaxillofacialsurgery AT vanminnenbaucke comparisonofthemechanicalpropertiesofbiodegradableandtitaniumosteosynthesissystemsusedinoralandmaxillofacialsurgery |