Literature DB >> 15105750

A biomechanical evaluation of methods of distal humerus fracture fixation using locking compression plates versus conventional reconstruction plates.

Jan Korner1, Gerd Diederichs, Michael Arzdorf, Helmut Lill, Christoph Josten, Erich Schneider, Berend Linke.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine the biomechanical behavior of 2 techniques of double-plate osteosynthesis for fractures of the adult distal humerus using conventional reconstruction plates and locking compression plates.
DESIGN: Basic science study.
SETTING: Experimental in vitro study. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Forty fresh-frozen human distal humeri specimens. INTERVENTION: Four matched groups with 10 humeri each, median age 74 years (46-95), were created using similar bone mineral density values. Two standard configurations of double-plate osteosynthesis (dorsal or 90 degrees configuration) with either conventional reconstruction plates or locking compression plates were studied for biomechanical properties of the constructs. A fracture model with a 5-mm supracondylar osteotomy gap simulating metaphyseal comminution (AO type 13-A3.3) was used. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Stiffness testing of the constructs in anterior/posterior bending, torsion, and axial compression loading. Evaluation of alterations of the bone-implant interface and failure patterns under cyclic loading and strength testing.
RESULTS: The study demonstrates that primary stiffness in anterior/posterior bending and torsional loading is significantly increased by using locking compression plates in a 90 degrees configuration (P < 0.05) as compared with dorsally applied plates. The differences between the different plate types are insignificant if applied in the same configuration. It is demonstrated that none of the tested implants failed under cyclic loading within the number of cycles expected for 3 months of use. The bone-implant interface is less likely to fail during strength testing with locking compression plates.
CONCLUSION: The biomechanical behavior of the osteosynthesis depends more on plate configuration than plate type. Advantages of locking compression plates are only significant if compared with dorsal plate application techniques. Nevertheless, locking compression plates are helpful supplementary tools for achieving primary stable fracture fixation. This might be of considerable clinical relevance in patients with diminished bone mineral quality or in the presence of metaphyseal comminution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15105750     DOI: 10.1097/00005131-200405000-00004

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


  35 in total

1.  Biomechanical study of different plate configurations for distal humerus osteosynthesis.

Authors:  M Bogataj; F Kosel; R Norris; M Krkovic; M Brojan
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-02-08       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Arterial supply of the distal humerus.

Authors:  Kilian Wegmann; K J Burkhart; T C Koslowsky; J Koebke; W F Neiss; L P Müller
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 1.246

3.  Outcomes of distal humerus diaphyseal injuries fixed with a single-column anatomic plate.

Authors:  John T Capo; Monika P Debkowska; Frank Liporace; Bryan G Beutel; Eitan Melamed
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-12-15       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Locking and Non-locking Constructs Achieve Similar Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes for Internal Fixation of Intra-articular Distal Humerus Fractures.

Authors:  Marschall Berkes; Grant Garrigues; John Solic; Nathan Van Zeeland; Nader Shourbaji; Kim Brouwer; Jesse Jupiter; David Ruch; William T Obremskey
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2011-09-15

5.  Outcome after internal fixation of intraarticular distal humerus (AO type B & C) fractures: Preliminary results with anatomical distal humerus LCP system.

Authors:  Jwalant Patel; Girish Motwani; Himanshu Shah; Rajeev Daveshwar
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2017-02-15

6.  [Distal fracture of the humerus].

Authors:  J M Rueger; A Rücker; D Briem
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 0.955

7.  Midterm clinical and radiological outcomes of the surgical treatment of complex AO type C distal humeral fractures with two different double plate fixation techniques.

Authors:  K Ditsios; S I Stavridis; P Savvidis; H Dinopoulos; G Petsatodis
Journal:  Hippokratia       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 0.471

8.  [Monteggia injuries in adults: Critical analysis of injury pattern, management, and results].

Authors:  J Korner; A Hoffmann; L Rudig; L P Müller; M Hessmann; H Lill; C Josten; P M Rommens
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 1.000

9.  Treatment of distal humeral fractures using conventional implants. Biomechanical evaluation of a new implant configuration.

Authors:  Markus Windolf; Edgardo Ramos Maza; Boyko Gueorguiev; Volker Braunstein; Karsten Schwieger
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Biomechanical testing of a new plate system for the distal humerus compared to two well-established implants.

Authors:  Christine Voigt; Christina Rank; Klaus Waizner; Robert Wendlandt; Andreas Unger; Arndt P Schulz; Christian Jürgens; Felix Renken
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.