OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of standard and locking plates in bending. We hypothesised that titanium (Ti) constructs would have the greatest deformation and that String of Pearl (SOP) constructs would have the greatest strength and stiffness, and would behave differently compared to plates alone. METHODS: Dynamic compression plates (DCP), stainless steel (SS) limited contact (LC)-DCP®, Ti LC-DCP, locking compression plates (LCP), 10 mm and 11 mm advanced locking plate system (ALPS 10 / 11), SOP and Fixin plates were evaluated individually and as constructs applied to a validated bone model simulating a bridging osteosynthesis. Bending stiffness and strength were compared using one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey, and unpaired t-test (p <0.05). RESULTS: The SOP plates had significantly greater stiffness than all other plates; Ti LC-DCP, ALPS 10 and Fixin plates had significantly lower stiffness than all other plates. The SOP constructs had the highest mean bending stiffness, and strength that was significantly different from only the Ti LC-DCP, ALPS 10 and Fixin constructs. The ALPS 10 constructs had the lowest mean bending stiffness, and strength that was significantly different from only ALPS 11 and SOP constructs. Comparison of bending structural stiffness of plates versus constructs showed a significant difference in all plate pairs except for the DCP and ALPS 10. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Due to differing plate construct properties inherent to these diverse implant systems, identical approaches to fracture management and plate application cannot be applied.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of standard and locking plates in bending. We hypothesised that titanium (Ti) constructs would have the greatest deformation and that String of Pearl (SOP) constructs would have the greatest strength and stiffness, and would behave differently compared to plates alone. METHODS: Dynamic compression plates (DCP), stainless steel (SS) limited contact (LC)-DCP®, Ti LC-DCP, locking compression plates (LCP), 10 mm and 11 mm advanced locking plate system (ALPS 10 / 11), SOP and Fixin plates were evaluated individually and as constructs applied to a validated bone model simulating a bridging osteosynthesis. Bending stiffness and strength were compared using one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey, and unpaired t-test (p <0.05). RESULTS: The SOP plates had significantly greater stiffness than all other plates; Ti LC-DCP, ALPS 10 and Fixin plates had significantly lower stiffness than all other plates. The SOP constructs had the highest mean bending stiffness, and strength that was significantly different from only the Ti LC-DCP, ALPS 10 and Fixin constructs. The ALPS 10 constructs had the lowest mean bending stiffness, and strength that was significantly different from only ALPS 11 and SOP constructs. Comparison of bending structural stiffness of plates versus constructs showed a significant difference in all plate pairs except for the DCP and ALPS 10. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Due to differing plate construct properties inherent to these diverse implant systems, identical approaches to fracture management and plate application cannot be applied.