OBJECTIVE: Locking plates have become ubiquitous in modern fracture surgery. Recently, manufacturers have developed locking plates with polyaxial screw capabilities in order to optimise screw placement. It has already been demonstrated that inserting uniaxial locking screws off axis results in weaker loads to failure. Our hypothesis was that even implants specifically designed for polyaxial insertion would experience a drop-off in resistance when using non-perpendicular screws. METHODS: Four different types (one monoaxial and three polyaxial locking plates) of readily available small fragment plates were tested. A biomechanical model was developed to test the screws until failure (defined as breakage and rapid loss of >50% force). Screws were inserted at 0, 10 and 15°. RESULTS: The standard monoaxial locking mechanism sustained saw a 60% reduction in force (332N vs. 134N) when screws were inserted cross-threaded at 10°. Two polyaxial systems saw similar significant reductions in force of 45% and 34%, respectively at 15°. A third system utilizing an end cap locking mechanism showed highly variable results with large standard deviations. Polyaxial screws showed on average only limited reduction at 10 degrees of insertion angle. CONCLUSION: Newer designs of locking plates have attractive properties to allow more surgical options during fixation. However this freedom comes at the price of reduced force. Our results show that the safe zone for inserting these screws is closer to 20°, rather than the 30° indicated by the manufacturers. Also, the various polyaxial locking mechanisms seem to influence the overall resistance of the screws.
OBJECTIVE: Locking plates have become ubiquitous in modern fracture surgery. Recently, manufacturers have developed locking plates with polyaxial screw capabilities in order to optimise screw placement. It has already been demonstrated that inserting uniaxial locking screws off axis results in weaker loads to failure. Our hypothesis was that even implants specifically designed for polyaxial insertion would experience a drop-off in resistance when using non-perpendicular screws. METHODS: Four different types (one monoaxial and three polyaxial locking plates) of readily available small fragment plates were tested. A biomechanical model was developed to test the screws until failure (defined as breakage and rapid loss of >50% force). Screws were inserted at 0, 10 and 15°. RESULTS: The standard monoaxial locking mechanism sustained saw a 60% reduction in force (332N vs. 134N) when screws were inserted cross-threaded at 10°. Two polyaxial systems saw similar significant reductions in force of 45% and 34%, respectively at 15°. A third system utilizing an end cap locking mechanism showed highly variable results with large standard deviations. Polyaxial screws showed on average only limited reduction at 10 degrees of insertion angle. CONCLUSION: Newer designs of locking plates have attractive properties to allow more surgical options during fixation. However this freedom comes at the price of reduced force. Our results show that the safe zone for inserting these screws is closer to 20°, rather than the 30° indicated by the manufacturers. Also, the various polyaxial locking mechanisms seem to influence the overall resistance of the screws.
Authors: Matthieu Ehlinger; Benjamin Scheibling; Michel Rahme; David Brinkert; Benoit Schenck; Antonio Di Marco; Philippe Adam; François Bonnomet Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 3.075