[Comparative biomechanical studies on implant systems for the treatment of distal radius fractures: what are the conclusions for clinical practice?].

AIM: This review evaluates which conclusions can be drawn for the clinical daily routine in operative treatment of distal radius fractures, regarding the published biomechanical studies concerning implant systems within the last 10 years.
METHOD: After identification of 21 articles about biomechanical studies of implant systems for the treatment of distal radius fractures from a literature search, these articles were analysed concerning the specimens, the fracture model as well as the implants used. The quintessence was reviewed with regard to their clinical relevance.
RESULTS: All tested palmar angular stable plate systems showed sufficient stiffness for holding the load transmission from the hand to the forearm also within active fist closure. There was no advantage of palmar angular stable plates concerning stiffness compared to dorsal angular stable plates. Angular stable plates are superior over non-angular stable plates in treatment of distal radius extension fractures. Locking screws should be preferred over locking pegs. Subchondrally placed screws have a higher stability than more proximal localised screws. When palmar plates with 2 rows of distal screw holes are used, the highest stability can be achieved by filling all screw holes. However using 2 screws in each row is sufficient.
CONCLUSION: There were clinically relevant implications from the published biomechanical studies concerning implant systems for treatment of distal radius fractures in the last 10 years and their considerations provide a safer therapy of distal radius fractures. These are to be respected accordingly. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.