Literature DB >> 12902785

Biomechanical comparison of posterior pelvic ring fixation.

Kent Yinger1, Jason Scalise, Steven A Olson, Brian K Bay, Christopher G Finkemeier.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine relative stiffness of various methods of posterior pelvic ring internal fixation.
DESIGN: Simulated single leg stance loading of OTA 61-Cl.2, a2 fracture model (unilateral sacroiliac joint disruption and pubic symphysis diastasis).
SETTING: Orthopaedic biomechanic laboratory. OUTCOME VARIABLES: Pubic symphysis gapping, sacroiliac joint gapping, hemipelvis coronal plane rotation.
METHODS: Nine different posterior pelvic ring fixation methods were tested on each of six hard plastic pelvic models. Pubic symphysis was plated. The pelvic ring was loaded to 1000N.
RESULTS: All data were normalized to values obtained with posterior fixation with a single iliosacral screw. The types of fixation could be grouped into three categories based on relative stiffness of fixation: For sacroiliac joint gapping, group 1-fixation stiffness 0.8 and above (least stiff) includes a single iliosacral screw (conditions A and J), an isolated tension band plate (condition F), and two sacral bars (condition H); group 2-fixation stiffness 0.6 to 0.8 (intermediate stiffness) includes a tension band plate and an iliosacral screw (condition E), one or two sacral bars in combination with an iliosacral screw (conditions G and I); group 3-fixation stiffness 0.6 and below (greatest stiffness) includes two anterior sacroiliac plates (condition D), two iliosacral screws (condition B), and two anterior sacroiliac plates and an iliosacral screw (condition C). For sacroiliac joint rotation, group 1-fixation stiffness 0.8 and above includes a single iliosacral screw (conditions A and J), two anterior sacroiliac plates (condition D), a tension band plate in isolation or in combination with an iliosacral screw (conditions E and F), and two sacral bars (condition H); group 2-fixation stiffness 0.6 to 0.8 (intermediate level of instability) includes either one or two sacral bars in combination with an iliosacral screw (conditions G and I); group 3-fixation stiffness 0.6 and below (stiffest fixation) consists of two iliosacral screws (condition B) and two anterior sacroiliac plates and an iliosacral screw (condition C). DISCUSSION: Under conditions of maximal instability with similar material properties between specimens, differences in stiffness of posterior pelvic ring fixation can be demonstrated. The choice of which method to use is multifactorial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12902785     DOI: 10.1097/00005131-200308000-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0890-5339            Impact factor:   2.512


  40 in total

Review 1.  [Technique for percutaneous iliosacral screw insertion with conventional C-arm radiography].

Authors:  R E Hilgert; J Finn; H-J Egbers
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 1.000

2.  Treatment of posterior pelvic ring injuries with minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis.

Authors:  Tang Hao; Yang Changwei; Zhang Qiulin
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2009-04-08       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Biomechanical evaluation of supplemental percutaneous lumbo-sacro-iliac screws for spinopelvic fixation following total sacrectomy.

Authors:  Vu H Le; Nathanael Heckmann; Nickul Jain; Lawrence Wang; Alexander W L Turner; Thay Q Lee; S Samuel Bederman
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2015-05

4.  Biomechanical comparison of three types of internal fixation in a type C zone II pelvic fracture model.

Authors:  Tao Wu; Wei Chen; Xu Li; Qi Zhang; Hong-Zhi Lv; Ying-Ze Zhang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-02-15

5.  Triangular Titanium Implants for Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: 2-Year Follow-Up from a Prospective Multicenter Trial.

Authors:  Bradley S Duhon; Fabien Bitan; Harry Lockstadt; Don Kovalsky; Daniel Cher; Travis Hillen
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-04-20

6.  Biomechanical analysis of a transiliac internal fixator.

Authors:  Thomas Dienstknecht; Arne Berner; Andreas Lenich; Johannes Zellner; Michael Mueller; Michael Nerlich; Bernd Fuechtmeier
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Functional outcome of unstable pelvic ring injuries after iliosacral screw fixation: single versus two screw fixation.

Authors:  S A Khaled; O Soliman; M A Wahed
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 3.693

8.  Biomechanical comparison of locked versus non-locked symphyseal plating of unstable pelvic ring injuries.

Authors:  R J Godinsky; G A Vrabec; L M Guseila; D E Filipkowski; J J Elias
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.693

9.  Mechanical comparison of iliosacral reconstruction techniques after sarcoma resection.

Authors:  Craig R Louer; Nader A Nassif; Michael D Brodt; Daniel J Leib; Matthew J Silva; Douglas J McDonald
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 2.063

10.  [Unilateral triangular lumbopelvic stabilization: indications and techniques].

Authors:  M F Hoffmann; M Dudda; T A Schildhauer
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 1.000

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.