Literature DB >> 20653962

The biomechanical analysis of three plating fixation systems for periprosthetic femoral fracture near the tip of a total hip arthroplasty.

James P Lever1, Rad Zdero, Markku T Nousiainen, James P Waddell, Emil H Schemitsch.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A variety of techniques are available for fixation of femoral shaft fractures following total hip arthroplasty. The optimal surgical repair method still remains a point of controversy in the literature. However, few studies have quantified the performance of such repair constructs. This study biomechanically examined 3 different screw-plate and cable-plate systems for fixation of periprosthetic femoral fractures near the tip of a total hip arthroplasty.
METHODS: Twelve pairs of human cadaveric femurs were utilized. Each left femur was prepared for the cemented insertion of the femoral component of a total hip implant. Femoral fractures were created in the femurs and subsequently repaired with Construct A (Zimmer Cable Ready System), Construct B (AO Cable-Plate System), or Construct C (Dall-Miles Cable Grip System). Right femora served as matched intact controls. Axial, torsional, and four-point bending tests were performed to obtain stiffness values.
RESULTS: All repair systems showed 3.08 to 5.33 times greater axial stiffness over intact control specimens. Four-point normalized bending (0.69 to 0.85) and normalized torsional (0.55 to 0.69) stiffnesses were lower than intact controls for most comparisons. Screw-plates provided either greater or equal stiffness compared to cable-plates in almost all cases. There were no statistical differences between plating systems A, B, or C when compared to each other (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Screw-plate systems provide more optimal mechanical stability than cable-plate systems for periprosthetic femur fractures near the tip of a total hip arthroplasty.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 20653962      PMCID: PMC2914750          DOI: 10.1186/1749-799X-5-45

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res        ISSN: 1749-799X            Impact factor:   2.359


  29 in total

1.  The reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification of femoral fractures after hip replacement.

Authors:  O H Brady; D S Garbuz; B A Masri; C P Duncan
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Comparative left-right mechanical testing of cancellous bone from normal femoral heads.

Authors:  X Banse; C Delloye; O Cornu; R Bourgois
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 2.712

3.  Influence of the number of cortices on the stiffness of plate fixation of diaphyseal fractures.

Authors:  A W ElMaraghy; M W ElMaraghy; M Nousiainen; R R Richards; E H Schemitsch
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.512

4.  A biomechanical study comparing cortical onlay allograft struts and plates in the treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Authors:  Darrin Wilson; Hanspeter Frei; Bassam A Masri; Thomas R Oxland; Clive P Duncan
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.063

5.  Periprosthetic fractures of the femur. An analysis of 93 fractures.

Authors:  R K Beals; S S Tower
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Fracture of the ipsilateral femur in patients wih total hip replacement.

Authors:  J E Johansson; R McBroom; T W Barrington; G A Hunter
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1981-12       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Fixation of periprosthetic femoral shaft fractures associated with cemented femoral stems: a biomechanical comparison of locked plating and conventional cable plates.

Authors:  Eric Fulkerson; Kenneth Koval; Charles F Preston; Kazuho Iesaka; Frederick J Kummer; Kenneth A Egol
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.512

8.  Proximal femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  J S Bethea; J R DeAndrade; L L Fleming; S D Lindenbaum; R B Welch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  The biomechanics of ipsilateral intertrochanteric and femoral shaft fractures: a comparison of 5 fracture fixation techniques.

Authors:  Alison McConnell; Rad Zdero; Khalid Syed; Christopher Peskun; Emil Schemitsch
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.512

10.  Fixation of periprosthetic femur fractures: a biomechanical analysis comparing cortical strut allograft plates and conventional metal plates.

Authors:  Christopher L Peters; Kent N Bachus; James S Davitt
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 1.390

View more
  13 in total

1.  The locking attachment plate for proximal fixation of periprosthetic femur fractures--a biomechanical comparison of two techniques.

Authors:  Mark Lenz; Markus Windolf; Thomas Mückley; Gunther O Hofmann; Michael Wagner; Robert G Richards; Karsten Schwieger; Boyko Gueorguiev
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-05-27       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Biomechanics of periprosthetic femur fractures and early weightbearing.

Authors:  Ansab Khwaja; William Mahoney; Jay Johnson; Alex Trompeter; Jason Lowe
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-04-14

3.  Minimally invasive periprosthetic plate osteosynthesis using the locking attachment plate.

Authors:  C Kammerlander; S L Kates; M Wagner; T Roth; M Blauth
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 1.154

4.  Biomechanical comparison of two angular stable plate constructions for periprosthetic femur fracture fixation.

Authors:  Dirk Wähnert; Richard Schröder; Martin Schulze; Peter Westerhoff; Michael Raschke; Richard Stange
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Tangential Bicortical Locked Fixation Improves Stability in Vancouver B1 Periprosthetic Femur Fractures: A Biomechanical Study.

Authors:  Gregory S Lewis; Cyrus T Caroom; Hwabok Wee; Darin Jurgensmeier; Shane D Rothermel; Michelle A Bramer; John Spence Reid
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.512

6.  Interprosthetic and interimplant femoral fractures: is bone strut allograft augmentation with ORIF a validity alternative solution in elderly?

Authors:  Giuseppe Pica; Francesco Liuzza; Mario Ronga; Luigi Meccariello; Domenico De Mauro; Amarildo Smakaj; Enio De Cruto; Giuseppe Rollo
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2022-10-13

7.  Different thermal conductivity in drilling of cemented compared with cementless hip prostheses in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the proximal femur: an experimental biomechanical analysis.

Authors:  Stephan Brand; Johannes Klotz; Thomas Hassel; Maximilian Petri; Max Ettinger; Christian Krettek; Thomas Goesling; Friedrich-Wilhelm Bach
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-06-18       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 8.  Periprosthetic fractures around the femoral stem: overcoming challenges and avoiding pitfalls.

Authors:  Andrew N Fleischman; Antonia F Chen
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-09

9.  Comparison of different fixation techniques for periprosthetic fractures: a biomechanical study of a new implant.

Authors:  Mehmet Nuri Konya; Ugur Yuzuguldu; Recep Altin; Ugur Fidan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Feasibility of the Inner-Side-Out Use of the LC-DCP for Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture in Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Heejae Won; Jun-Young Kim; Seung-Hoon Baek; Wonki Hong; Jee-Wook Yoon; Shin-Yoon Kim
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 1.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.