Colin A Mudrick1, John R Owen, Jennifer S Wayne, Jonathan E Isaacs. 1. Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, P.O. Box 980153, Richmond, VA 23298-0153, USA. cmudrick@mcvh-vcu.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: There are numerous constructs employed in the treatment of metacarpal fractures with varying degrees of success. While plate fixation commonly involves dorsal application of a bicortical non-locking plate, there has been recent exploration of other fixation options including unicortical locked plating. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical integrity of a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) inset locking plate and, in doing so, compare it to standard plate fixation (utilizing a clinically proven bicortical non-locking titanium plate) in a simulated porcine metacarpal fracture model. METHODS: Reproducible mid-shaft fractures were created in porcine second metacarpals. The fractured specimens were reduced and plated with either a bicortical non-locking plate or a unicortical locking plate with a PEEK locking design. Constructs were then loaded to failure in the same fashion as performed to create the fracture. Peak load was measured as the apex on the load-to-failure deflection curve. Stiffness was calculated as the linear slope on the load-to-failure deflection curve. Data were analyzed via Student's t test. RESULTS: Unicortical locking constructs failed at 344 ± 119 N, while bicortical non-locking constructs were found to fail at 277 ± 101 N (p = 0.19). The unicortical locking constructs demonstrated a stiffness of 80 ± 36 N/mm compared with the bicortical non-locking constructs (69 ± 36 N/mm) although again the difference was not found to be statistically different (p = 0.49). CONCLUSION: Based on this study, a locked plating construct using a polymer mechanism provides an interesting new locking fixation method for small bone fractures and with our limited number of specimens tested, provided at least a similar strength and rigidity profile in comparison with bicortical fixation in the treatment of metacarpal fractures.
PURPOSE: There are numerous constructs employed in the treatment of metacarpal fractures with varying degrees of success. While plate fixation commonly involves dorsal application of a bicortical non-locking plate, there has been recent exploration of other fixation options including unicortical locked plating. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical integrity of a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) inset locking plate and, in doing so, compare it to standard plate fixation (utilizing a clinically proven bicortical non-locking titanium plate) in a simulated porcine metacarpal fracture model. METHODS: Reproducible mid-shaft fractures were created in porcine second metacarpals. The fractured specimens were reduced and plated with either a bicortical non-locking plate or a unicortical locking plate with a PEEK locking design. Constructs were then loaded to failure in the same fashion as performed to create the fracture. Peak load was measured as the apex on the load-to-failure deflection curve. Stiffness was calculated as the linear slope on the load-to-failure deflection curve. Data were analyzed via Student's t test. RESULTS: Unicortical locking constructs failed at 344 ± 119 N, while bicortical non-locking constructs were found to fail at 277 ± 101 N (p = 0.19). The unicortical locking constructs demonstrated a stiffness of 80 ± 36 N/mm compared with the bicortical non-locking constructs (69 ± 36 N/mm) although again the difference was not found to be statistically different (p = 0.49). CONCLUSION: Based on this study, a locked plating construct using a polymer mechanism provides an interesting new locking fixation method for small bone fractures and with our limited number of specimens tested, provided at least a similar strength and rigidity profile in comparison with bicortical fixation in the treatment of metacarpal fractures.
Authors: Nadim James Hallab; Kyron McAllister; Mark Brady; Marcus Jarman-Smith Journal: J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 3.368
Authors: Kenneth A Egol; Erik N Kubiak; Eric Fulkerson; Frederick J Kummer; Kenneth J Koval Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 2.512