| Literature DB >> 28241752 |
Joost J A de Jong1,2, Arno Lataster3, Bert van Rietbergen4, Jacobus J Arts4,5,6, Piet P Geusens7,6,8, Joop P W van den Bergh9,7,8,10, Paul C Willems5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Carbon-fiber-reinforced poly-ether-ether-ketone (CFR-PEEK) has superior radiolucency compared to other orthopedic implant materials, e.g. titanium or stainless steel, thus allowing metal-artifact-free postoperative monitoring by computed tomography (CT). Recently, high-resolution peripheral quantitative CT (HRpQCT) proved to be a promising technique to monitor the recovery of volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), micro-architecture and biomechanical parameters in stable conservatively treated distal radius fractures. When using HRpQCT to monitor unstable distal radius fractures that require volar distal radius plating for fixation, radiolucent CFR-PEEK plates may be a better alternative to currently used titanium plates to allow for reliable assessment. In this pilot study, we assessed the effect of a volar distal radius plate made from CFR-PEEK on bone parameters obtained from HRpQCT in comparison to two titanium plates.Entities:
Keywords: CFR-PEEK; Distal radius; HRpQCT; Implant; Injury/fracture healing
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28241752 PMCID: PMC5327545 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-017-0190-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Imaging ISSN: 1471-2342 Impact factor: 1.930
Fig. 1Each volar distal radius plate was instrumented in one cadaveric forearm by means of a standard volar approach. The CFR-PEEK plate is shown in panel a and the two titanium plates in panels b and c. In each plate, five screws were fixed in the metaphysis and two screws were fixed in the shaft. The region of interest (ROI, between dotted lines) was set such that it was fully covered by a part of the plate without screws or holes
Fig. 2Lateral scoutviews of each instrumented radius showing the region of interest (ROI) in each radius. The ROI was chosen at a location where the radius was fully covered by a part of the plate without holes and that was not intersected by screws. The tantalum fibers in the CFR-PEEK plate (left) allow visualization of the plate
Fig. 3Representative HRpQCT slices in each radius with (a, b and c) and without instrumented plate (d, e and f). The CFR-PEEK plate with tantalum fibers (panel a) caused less visible image artifacts as compared to the titanium plates (panel b and c), which caused streak artifacts (white arrows) and an increased intensity of voxels close to the titanium plates (black arrows)
Reproducibility (RMSCV%) calculated from duplicate HRpQCT measurements at the uninstrumented and instrumented radii
| Bone parameter | RMSCV% Radius #1 | RMSCV% Radius #2 | RMSCV% Radius #3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Un-instrumented | Instrumented (CFR-PEEK) | Un-instrumented | Instrumented (Titanium) | Un-instrumented | Instrumented (Titanium) | |
| vBMD | ||||||
| Dtot | 0.52 | 2.18 | 0.02 | 1.29 | 0.00 | 0.20 |
| Dtrab | 0.10 | 1.95 | 0.34 | 0.00 | 0.31 | 0.62 |
| Dcort | 0.31 | 1.48 | 0.24 | 1.13 | 0.01 | 0.06 |
| Micro − architecture | ||||||
| BV/TV | 0.00 | 1.76 | 0.47 | 0.00 | 1.25 | 0.00 |
| Tb.N | 2.24 | 0.92 | 0.00 | 1.19 | 0.72 | 0.67 |
| Tb.Th | 1.84 | 0.90 | 0.00 | 1.66 | 0.00 | 1.11 |
| Tb.Sp | 2.16 | 0.99 | 0.16 | 1.13 | 0.37 | 0.08 |
| Ct.Th | 1.50 | 1.55 | 0.00 | 1.65 | 0.93 | 0.00 |
| Biomechanical | ||||||
| Scomp | 0.42 | 1.38 | 0.28 | 1.71 | 0.02 | 0.49 |
| F.Ult | 0.28 | 1.30 | 0.40 | 2.23 | 0.06 | 0.54 |
Abbreviations: vBMD volumetric bone mineral density, Dtot total density, Dtrab trabecular density, Dcort cortical density, BV/TV bone to total volume, Tb.N trabecular number, Tb.Th trabecular thickness, Tb.Sp trabecular separation, Ct.Th cortical thickness, Scomp compression stiffness, F.Ult ultimate failure load
Bone mineral density, micro-architectural and biomechanical parameters measured with HRpQCT at the uninstrumented and instrumented distal radius and the percent difference between them
| Bone parameter | Radius #1 | Radius #2 | Radius #3 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Un-instrumented | Instrumented (CFR-PEEK) | Error (Δ%) | Un-instrumented | Instrumented (Titanium) | Error (Δ%) | Un-instrumented | Instrumented (Titanium) | Error (Δ%) | |
| vBMD | |||||||||
| Dtot [mgHA/cm3] | 273 | 266 | (−2.5) | 343 | 520 | (+51.8) | 229 | 245 | (+6.7) |
| Dtrab [mgHA/cm3] | 146 | 145 | (−0.8) | 181 | 304 | (+67.2) | 62 | 80 | (+30.2) |
| Dcort [mgHA/cm3] | 862 | 848 | (−1.6) | 839 | 1004 | (+19.6) | 853 | 850 | (−0.3) |
| Micro − architecture | |||||||||
| BV/TV [−] | 0.122 | 0.121 | (−1.2) | 0.152 | 0.253 | (+67.0) | 0.052 | 0.067 | (+30.1) |
| Tb.N [mm−1] | 1.58 | 1.54 | (−2.2) | 1.92 | 2.98 | (+55.0) | 0.96 | 1.06 | (+10.5) |
| Tb.Th [mm] | 0.077 | 0.079 | (+1.9) | 0.079 | 0.085 | (+7.6) | 0.054 | 0.064 | (+17.6) |
| Tb.Sp [mm] | 0.557 | 0.571 | (+2.6) | 0.442 | 0.251 | (−43.2) | 0.996 | 0.885 | (−11.2) |
| Ct.Th [mm] | 0.94 | 0.91 | (−3.2) | 1.01 | 1.29 | (+27.2) | 0.76 | 0.76 | (+0.7) |
| Biomechanical | |||||||||
| Scomp [N/mm] | 150 | 147 | (−1.9) | 133 | 143 | (+7.5) | 70 | 69 | (−1.0) |
| F.Ult [kN] | 7.17 | 7.06 | (−1.5) | 6.24 | 6.85 | (+9.8) | 3.28 | 3.28 | (+0.1) |
Abbreviations: vBMD volumetric bone mineral density, Dtot total density, Dtrab trabecular density, Dcort cortical density, BV/TV bone to total volume, Tb.N trabecular number, Tb.Th trabecular thickness, Tb.Sp trabecular separation, Ct.Th cortical thickness, Scomp compression stiffness, F.Ult ultimate failure load