Literature DB >> 17473753

The effect of concurrent fibular fracture on the fixation of distal tibia fractures: a laboratory comparison of intramedullary nails with locked plates.

Eric J Strauss1, Daniel Alfonso, Frederick J Kummer, Kenneth A Egol, Nirmal C Tejwani.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the fixation stability of intramedullary nails to that of locked plates for the treatment of distal metaphyseal tibia and fibula fractures.
METHODS: A simulated, distal metaphyseal tibia fracture was created in 8 pairs of cadaveric tibia-fibula specimens. One of each pair was treated using an intramedullary nail (Trigen IM Nail System; SN Richards, Memphis, TN) and the other with a locked plate (Peri-Loc Periarticular Locked Plating System; SN Richards). Each specimen was vertically loaded to 250 N in central, anterior, posterior, medial, and lateral locations; loaded to 250 N in cantilever bending in anterior to posterior and posterior to anterior directions; and loaded to 250 N mm in torsion. Load-displacement curves were generated to determine the construct stiffness for each loading scenario, with comparisons made between the 2 treatment groups. Each specimen was then cyclically loaded with 750 N vertical loads applied for 10, 100, 1000, and 10,000 cycles. Measurements of fracture displacements were made and compared between treatment groups. A fibular osteotomy was then created in each specimen at the same level as the tibia fracture to simulate a same-level tibia-fibular fracture. Torsional stiffness assessment and cyclic vertical loading for 10, 100, 1000, and 10,000 cycles were repeated and fracture displacement measurements were again obtained.
RESULTS: The locked plate construct was stiffer than the intramedullary nail construct for central, anterior, and posterior loading scenarios (P < 0.005, P < 0.03, and P < 0.02, respectively). The intramedullary nail construct was stiffer than the locked plate construct for both anterior to posterior and posterior to anterior cantilever bending (P < 0.03 and P < 0.02, respectively). No statistically significant difference in stiffness was noted between treatment groups for medial and lateral vertical loading or for torsional loading (P = 0.09, P = 0.32, and P = 0.84, respectively). There was no significant difference between treatment groups with respect to fracture displacement after cyclic vertical loading. After creation of the fibular osteotomy fracture, construct displacements after 1000 and 10,000 cycles significantly increased and torsional stiffness significantly decreased for both treatment groups. The locked plate constructs had significantly less displacement after cyclic loading of 1000 and 10,000 than the locked nail constructs (P < 0.001 and P < 0.0001, respectively). Locked plate constructs were stiffer in torsion after osteotomy than the intramedullary nail constructs (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that, in the treatment of distal metaphyseal tibia fractures, locked plates provided more stable fixation than intramedullary nails in vertical loading but were less effective in cantilever bending. An intact fibula in the presence of a distal tibia fracture improved the fracture fixation stability for both treatment methods. In fracture patterns in which the fibula cannot be effectively stabilized, locked plates offer improved mechanical stability when compared with locked intramedullary nails.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17473753     DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3180332dd2

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


  12 in total

1.  Distal tibia fractures and medial plating: factors influencing re-operation.

Authors:  Vasanth Sathiyakumar; Rachel V Thakore; Rivka C Ihejirika; William T Obremskey; Manish K Sethi
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-04-27       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Distal Tibial Fractures: Intramedullary Nailing.

Authors:  Andreas H Ruecker; Michael Hoffmann; Martin E Rupprecht; Johannes M Rueger
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2009-11-16       Impact factor: 3.693

3.  Intramedullary nailing versus plating for distal tibia fractures without articular involvement: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhi Mao; Guoqi Wang; Lihai Zhang; Licheng Zhang; Shuo Chen; Hailong Du; Yanpeng Zhao; Peifu Tang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 2.359

4.  Hindfoot Valgus following Interlocking Nail Treatment for Tibial Diaphysis Fractures: Can the Fibula Be Neglected?

Authors:  Metin Uzun; Adnan Kara; Müjdat Adaş; Bülent Karslioğlu; Murat Bülbül; Burak Beksaç
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2014-12-07

5.  The Role of Fibular Fixation in the Treatment of Combined Distal Tibia and Fibula Fracture: A Randomized, Control Trial.

Authors:  Mohammad Javdan; Mohammad Ali Tahririan; Morteza Nouri
Journal:  Adv Biomed Res       Date:  2017-04-25

6.  Locking versus Non-locking Neutralization Plates with Limited Excision and Internal Fixation for Treatment of Extra-articular Type a Distal Tibial Fractures.

Authors:  Kai-Hua Zhou; Nong Chen
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2017-02-28

7.  Experimental and numerical investigation into the influence of loading conditions in biomechanical testing of locking plate fracture fixation devices.

Authors:  A MacLeod; A H R W Simpson; P Pankaj
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 5.853

8.  When is indicated fibular fixation in extra-articular fractures of the distal tibia?

Authors:  Francesco Pogliacomi; Paolo Schiavi; Filippo Calderazzi; Francesco Ceccarelli; Enrico Vaienti
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2019-01-15

Review 9.  Prevalence and influencing factors of nonunion in patients with tibial fracture: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ruifeng Tian; Fang Zheng; Wei Zhao; Yuhui Zhang; Jinping Yuan; Bowen Zhang; Liangman Li
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  Distal tibial metaphyseal fractures: does blocking screw extend the indication of intramedullary nailing?

Authors:  Mugundhan Moongilpatti Sengodan; Singaravadivelu Vaidyanathan; Sankaralingam Karunanandaganapathy; Sukumaran Subbiah Subramanian; Samuel Gnanam Rajamani
Journal:  ISRN Orthop       Date:  2014-02-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.