Literature DB >> 15213501

A laboratory model to evaluate cutout resistance of implants for pertrochanteric fracture fixation.

Mark B Sommers1, Christoph Roth, H Hall, Benjamin C C Kam, Larry W Ehmke, James C Krieg, Steven M Madey, Michael Bottlang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To establish a laboratory model of implant cutout, which can evaluate the effect of implant design on cutout resistance in a clinically realistic "worst case" scenario.
SETTING: Orthopaedic biomechanics laboratory.
DESIGN: Implant cutout was simulated in an unstable pertrochanteric fracture model, which accounted for dynamic loading, osteoporotic bone, and a defined implant offset. For model characterization, lag screw cutout was simulated in human cadaveric specimens and in polyurethane foam surrogates. Subsequently, foam surrogates were used to determine differences in cutout resistance between 2 common lag screws (dynamic hip screw, Gamma) and 2 novel blade-type implant designs (dynamic helical hip system, trochanteric fixation nail). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Implant migration was continuously recorded with a spatial motion tracking system as a function of the applied loading cycles. In addition, the total number of loading cycles to cutout failure was determined for specific load amplitudes.
RESULTS: Implant migration in polyurethane surrogates closely correlated with that in cadaveric specimens, but yielded higher reproducibility and consistent cutout failure. The cutout model was able to delineate significant differences in cutout resistance between specific implant designs. At any of 4 load amplitudes (0.8 kN, 1.0 kN, 1.2 kN, 1.4 kN) dynamic hip screw lag screws failed earliest. The gamma nail lag screw could sustain significantly more loading cycles than the dynamic hip screw. Of all implants, trochanteric fixation nail implants demonstrated the highest cutout resistance.
CONCLUSIONS: Implant design can significantly affect the fixation strength and cutout resistance of implants for pertrochanteric fracture fixation. The novel cutout model can predict differences in cutout resistance between distinct implant designs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15213501     DOI: 10.1097/00005131-200407000-00006

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


  51 in total

1.  Comment on Stern et al.: Prospective randomised study comparing screw versus helical blade in the treatment of low-energy trochanteric fractures.

Authors:  Ramprasad Kancherla; Sukesh Sankineni; Vivek Trikha; Ramakant Kumar; Rajesh Malhotra
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Comparative study of InterTAN and Dynamic Hip Screw in treatment of femoral intertrochanteric injury and wound.

Authors:  Qiang Wang; Xin Yang; Hua-Zheng He; Li-Jun Dong; De-Gang Huang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-12-15

3.  Prospective randomised study comparing screw versus helical blade in the treatment of low-energy trochanteric fractures.

Authors:  Richard Stern; Anne Lübbeke; Domizio Suva; Hermes Miozzari; Pierre Hoffmeyer
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-03-10       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 4.  [Pertrochanteric femoral fractures in the elderly].

Authors:  G H Sandmann; P Biberthaler
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.000

5.  A comparison of two fixation methods for femoral trochanteric fractures: a new generation intramedullary system vs sliding hip screw.

Authors:  Christian Carulli; Federico Piacentini; Tommaso Paoli; Roberto Civinini; Massimo Innocenti
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2017-05-30

6.  Proximal femoral nail antirotation against dynamic hip screw for unstable trochanteric fractures; a prospective randomized comparison.

Authors:  Sinan Zehir; R Zehir; Sultan Zehir; İ Azboy; N Haykir
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 3.693

7.  Is helical blade superior to screw design in terms of cut-out rate for elderly trochanteric fractures? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Xiao Huang; Frankie Leung; Ming Liu; Long Chen; Zhao Xu; Zhou Xiang
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2014-02-21

Review 8.  Is rotation the mode of failure in pertrochanteric fractures fixed with nails? Theoretical approach and illustrative cases.

Authors:  C Kokoroghiannis; D Vasilakos; K Zisis; G Dimitriou; E Pappa; D Evangelopoulos
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2019-09-20

Review 9.  Intertrochanteric fractures: a review of fixation methods.

Authors:  Senthil Nathan Sambandam; Jayadev Chandrasekharan; Varatharaj Mounasamy; Cyril Mauffrey
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-03-30

10.  Comparison of migration behavior between single and dual lag screw implants for intertrochanteric fracture fixation.

Authors:  George K Kouvidis; Mark B Sommers; Peter V Giannoudis; Pavlos G Katonis; Michael Bottlang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2009-05-18       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.