| Literature DB >> 28473698 |
Hunter Pelham1, Donald Benza2, Paul W Millhouse3, Nathan Carrington4, Md Arifuzzaman3, Caleb J Behrend5,6, Jeffrey N Anker5,3, John D DesJardins5.
Abstract
Current orthopaedic clinical methods do not provide an objective measure of fracture healing or weight bearing for lower extremity fractures. The following report describes a novel approach involving in-situ strain sensors to objectively measure fracture healing. The sensor uses a cantilevered indicator pin that responds to plate bending and an internal scale to demonstrate changes in the pin position on plain film radiographs. The long lever arm amplifies pin movement compared to interfragmentary motion, and the scale enables more accurate measurement of position changes. Testing with a human cadaver comminuted metaphyseal tibia fracture specimen demonstrated over 2.25 mm of reproducible sensor displacement on radiographs with as little as 100 N of axial compressive loading. Finite element simulations determined that pin displacement decreases as the fracture callus stiffens and that pin motion is linearly related to the strain in the callus. These results indicate that an implanted strain sensor is an effective tool to help assess bone healing after internal fixation and could provide an objective clinical measure for return to weight bearing.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28473698 PMCID: PMC5431424 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-01009-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Passive strain sensor design. (a) Solidworks model of passive strain sensor components mounted to an orthopedic plate modelled after Synthes 4.5 mm proximal tibia plate. (b) FEA of intact tibia geometry with attached plate sensor. Note no change in sensor response when comparing no load to 400 N compressive load. (c) FEA of tibia with 1 cm osteotomy treated with internal fixation. The plate is supporting all of the axial load, resulting in plate bending and pin displacement. Indicator pin rests between holes 3 and 4 with a 400 N axial compressive load.
Figure 2Fracture Callus FEA. (a) Strain distribution within the fracture callus for 400 N axial compression load with varying callus stiffness as a percent of cortical bone. (b) Pin displacement and maximum principal callus strain vs. callus stiffness. (c) Linear relationship between pin disp. and maximum callus principal strain.
Figure 3(a) Unfractured Sawbones® model. (b) Fractured Sawbones® model.
Figure 4Radiographic images of the Sensor. The implant, fracture gap, and passive strain sensor are shown for both unloaded and 100 N compression loaded cases in a human cadaver tibia. The indicator pin moves from below hole 1 to covering hole 4 under the 100 N load.
Figure 5Radiographic images of sensor response over multiple cycles.
Simulated Bone Material Properties.
| Longitudinal Tensile | Transverse Tensile | Compressive | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strength (MPa) | Modulus (GPa) | Strength (MPa) | Modulus (GPa) | Strength (MPa) | Modulus (GPa) | |
| Cortical | 106 | 16 | 93 | 10 | 157 | 16.7 |
| Cancellous | — | — | — | — | 6 | 0.155 |
The table shows the material properties used in the FEA presented in this paper. These material properties are provided by Sawbones® and are based on ASTM D-638 and D-695.
Figure 6Photo of prototype pin cover.