Cargando…
Comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis
BACKGROUND: Good clinical outcomes for locking plates as an external fixator to treat tibial fractures have been reported. However, external locking plate fixation is still generally rarely performed. This study aimed to compare the stability of an external locking plate fixator with that of a conve...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8753923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35016716 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-021-02907-3 |
_version_ | 1784632172386189312 |
---|---|
author | Blažević, Dejan Kodvanj, Janoš Adamović, Petra Vidović, Dinko Trobonjača, Zlatko Sabalić, Srećko |
author_facet | Blažević, Dejan Kodvanj, Janoš Adamović, Petra Vidović, Dinko Trobonjača, Zlatko Sabalić, Srećko |
author_sort | Blažević, Dejan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Good clinical outcomes for locking plates as an external fixator to treat tibial fractures have been reported. However, external locking plate fixation is still generally rarely performed. This study aimed to compare the stability of an external locking plate fixator with that of a conventional external fixator for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures using finite element analysis. METHODS: Three models were constructed: (1) external locking plate fixation of proximal tibial fracture with lateral proximal tibial locking plate and 5-mm screws (ELP), (2) conventional external fixation of proximal tibial fracture with an 11-mm rod and 5-mm Schanz screws (EF-11), and (3) conventional external fixation of a proximal tibial fracture with a 7-mm rod and 5-mm Schanz screws (EF-7). The stress distribution, displacement at the fracture gap, and stiffness of the three finite element models at 30-, 40-, 50-, and 60-mm plate–rod offsets from the lateral surface of the lateral condyle of the tibia were determined. RESULTS: The conventional external fixator showed higher stiffness than the external locking plate fixator. In all models, the stiffness decreased as the distance of the plate–rod from the bone surface increased. The maximum stiffness was 121.06 N/mm in the EF-11 model with 30-mm tibia–rod offset. In the EF-7 model group, the maximum stiffness was 40.00 N/mm in the model with 30-mm tibia–rod offset. In the ELP model group, the maximum stiffness was 35.79 N/mm in the model with 30-mm tibia–plate offset. CONCLUSIONS: Finite element analysis indicated that external locking plate fixation is more flexible than conventional external fixation and can influence secondary bone healing. External locking plate fixation requires the placement of the plate as close as possible to the skin, which allows for a low-profile design because the increased distance from the plate to the bone can be too flexible for bone healing. Further experimental mechanical model tests are necessary to validate these finite element models, and further biological analysis is necessary to evaluate the effect of external locking plate fixation on fracture healing. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8753923 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87539232022-01-18 Comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis Blažević, Dejan Kodvanj, Janoš Adamović, Petra Vidović, Dinko Trobonjača, Zlatko Sabalić, Srećko J Orthop Surg Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Good clinical outcomes for locking plates as an external fixator to treat tibial fractures have been reported. However, external locking plate fixation is still generally rarely performed. This study aimed to compare the stability of an external locking plate fixator with that of a conventional external fixator for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures using finite element analysis. METHODS: Three models were constructed: (1) external locking plate fixation of proximal tibial fracture with lateral proximal tibial locking plate and 5-mm screws (ELP), (2) conventional external fixation of proximal tibial fracture with an 11-mm rod and 5-mm Schanz screws (EF-11), and (3) conventional external fixation of a proximal tibial fracture with a 7-mm rod and 5-mm Schanz screws (EF-7). The stress distribution, displacement at the fracture gap, and stiffness of the three finite element models at 30-, 40-, 50-, and 60-mm plate–rod offsets from the lateral surface of the lateral condyle of the tibia were determined. RESULTS: The conventional external fixator showed higher stiffness than the external locking plate fixator. In all models, the stiffness decreased as the distance of the plate–rod from the bone surface increased. The maximum stiffness was 121.06 N/mm in the EF-11 model with 30-mm tibia–rod offset. In the EF-7 model group, the maximum stiffness was 40.00 N/mm in the model with 30-mm tibia–rod offset. In the ELP model group, the maximum stiffness was 35.79 N/mm in the model with 30-mm tibia–plate offset. CONCLUSIONS: Finite element analysis indicated that external locking plate fixation is more flexible than conventional external fixation and can influence secondary bone healing. External locking plate fixation requires the placement of the plate as close as possible to the skin, which allows for a low-profile design because the increased distance from the plate to the bone can be too flexible for bone healing. Further experimental mechanical model tests are necessary to validate these finite element models, and further biological analysis is necessary to evaluate the effect of external locking plate fixation on fracture healing. BioMed Central 2022-01-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8753923/ /pubmed/35016716 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-021-02907-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Blažević, Dejan Kodvanj, Janoš Adamović, Petra Vidović, Dinko Trobonjača, Zlatko Sabalić, Srećko Comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis |
title | Comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis |
title_full | Comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis |
title_fullStr | Comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis |
title_short | Comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis |
title_sort | comparison between external locking plate fixation and conventional external fixation for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures: a finite element analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8753923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35016716 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-021-02907-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT blazevicdejan comparisonbetweenexternallockingplatefixationandconventionalexternalfixationforextraarticularproximaltibialfracturesafiniteelementanalysis AT kodvanjjanos comparisonbetweenexternallockingplatefixationandconventionalexternalfixationforextraarticularproximaltibialfracturesafiniteelementanalysis AT adamovicpetra comparisonbetweenexternallockingplatefixationandconventionalexternalfixationforextraarticularproximaltibialfracturesafiniteelementanalysis AT vidovicdinko comparisonbetweenexternallockingplatefixationandconventionalexternalfixationforextraarticularproximaltibialfracturesafiniteelementanalysis AT trobonjacazlatko comparisonbetweenexternallockingplatefixationandconventionalexternalfixationforextraarticularproximaltibialfracturesafiniteelementanalysis AT sabalicsrecko comparisonbetweenexternallockingplatefixationandconventionalexternalfixationforextraarticularproximaltibialfracturesafiniteelementanalysis |