Matthias Knobe1, Simon Altgassen2, Klaus-Jürgen Maier3, Gertraud Gradl-Dietsch2, Chris Kaczmarek2, Sven Nebelung4, Kajetan Klos5, Bong-Sung Kim6, Boyko Gueorguiev7, Klemens Horst2, Benjamin Buecking8. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Trauma, University of Aachen Medical Center, 30 Pauwelsstreet, 52074, Aachen, Germany. mknobe@ukaachen.de. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Trauma, University of Aachen Medical Center, 30 Pauwelsstreet, 52074, Aachen, Germany. 3. Department of Surgery, RoMed Hospital Bad Aibling, Bad Aibling, Germany. 4. Department of Radiology, University of Aachen Medical Center, Aachen, Germany. 5. Department of Foot and Ankle Surgery, Catholic Hospital Mainz, Mainz, Germany. 6. Department of Plastic Surgery, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, University of Aachen Medical Center, Aachen, Germany. 7. AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland. 8. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Gießen and Marburg GmbH, Campus Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To reduce mechanical complications after osteosynthesis of femoral neck fractures, improved fixation techniques have been developed including blade or screw-anchor devices. This biomechanical study compares different fixation systems used for treatment of unstable femoral neck fractures with evaluation of failure mode, load to failure, stiffness, femoral head rotation, femoral neck shortening and femoral head migration. METHODS: Standardized Pauwels type 3 fractures (AO/OTA 31-B2) with comminution were created in 18 biomechanical sawbones using a custom-made sawguide. Fractures were stabilized using either SHS-Screw, SHS-Blade or Rotationally Stable Screw-Anchor (RoSA). Femurs were positioned in 25 degrees adduction and ten degrees posterior flexion and were cyclically loaded with an axial sinusoidal loading pattern of 0.5 Hz, starting with 300 N, with an increase by 300 N every 2000 cycles until bone-implant failure occurred. RESULTS: Mean failure load for the Screw-Anchor fixation (RoSA) was 5100 N (IQR 750 N), 3900 N (IQR 75 N) for SHS-Blade and 3000 N (IQR 675 N; p = 0.002) for SHS-Screw. For SHS-Screw and SHS-Blade we observed fracture displacement with consecutive fracture collapse as the main reason for failure, whereas RoSA mainly showed a cut-out under high loadings. Mean stiffness at 1800 N was 826 (IQR 431) N/mm for SHS-Screw, 1328 (IQR 441) N/mm for SHS-Blade and 1953 (IQR 617) N/mm for RoSA (p = 0.003). With a load of 1800 N (SHS-Screw 12° vs. SHS-Blade 7° vs. RoSA 2°; p = 0.003) and with 2700 N (24° vs. 15° vs. 3°; p = 0.002) the RoSA implants demonstrated a higher rotational stability and had the lowest femoral neck shortening (p = 0.002), compared with the SHS groups. At the 2700 N load point, RoSA systems showed a lower axial (p = 0.019) and cranial (p = 0.031) femoral head migration compared to the SHS-Screw. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the new Screw-Anchor fixation (RoSA) was superior to the comparable SHS implants regarding rotational stability and femoral neck shortening. Failure load, stiffness, femoral head migration, and resistance to fracture displacement were in RoSA implants higher than in SHS-Screws, but without significance in comparison to SHS-Blades.
OBJECTIVES: To reduce mechanical complications after osteosynthesis of femoral neck fractures, improved fixation techniques have been developed including blade or screw-anchor devices. This biomechanical study compares different fixation systems used for treatment of unstable femoral neck fractures with evaluation of failure mode, load to failure, stiffness, femoral head rotation, femoral neck shortening and femoral head migration. METHODS: Standardized Pauwels type 3 fractures (AO/OTA 31-B2) with comminution were created in 18 biomechanical sawbones using a custom-made sawguide. Fractures were stabilized using either SHS-Screw, SHS-Blade or Rotationally Stable Screw-Anchor (RoSA). Femurs were positioned in 25 degrees adduction and ten degrees posterior flexion and were cyclically loaded with an axial sinusoidal loading pattern of 0.5 Hz, starting with 300 N, with an increase by 300 N every 2000 cycles until bone-implant failure occurred. RESULTS: Mean failure load for the Screw-Anchor fixation (RoSA) was 5100 N (IQR 750 N), 3900 N (IQR 75 N) for SHS-Blade and 3000 N (IQR 675 N; p = 0.002) for SHS-Screw. For SHS-Screw and SHS-Blade we observed fracture displacement with consecutive fracture collapse as the main reason for failure, whereas RoSA mainly showed a cut-out under high loadings. Mean stiffness at 1800 N was 826 (IQR 431) N/mm for SHS-Screw, 1328 (IQR 441) N/mm for SHS-Blade and 1953 (IQR 617) N/mm for RoSA (p = 0.003). With a load of 1800 N (SHS-Screw 12° vs. SHS-Blade 7° vs. RoSA 2°; p = 0.003) and with 2700 N (24° vs. 15° vs. 3°; p = 0.002) the RoSA implants demonstrated a higher rotational stability and had the lowest femoral neck shortening (p = 0.002), compared with the SHS groups. At the 2700 N load point, RoSA systems showed a lower axial (p = 0.019) and cranial (p = 0.031) femoral head migration compared to the SHS-Screw. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the new Screw-Anchor fixation (RoSA) was superior to the comparable SHS implants regarding rotational stability and femoral neck shortening. Failure load, stiffness, femoral head migration, and resistance to fracture displacement were in RoSA implants higher than in SHS-Screws, but without significance in comparison to SHS-Blades.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biomechanical testing; Cut-out; Failure; Femoral neck fracture; Fragment displacement; Helical blade; Migration; Rotation; Rotationally stable screw-anchor; Sliding hip screw
Authors: Sarat C Kunapuli; Matthew J Schramski; Angela S Lee; John M Popovich; Jacek Cholewicki; N Peter Reeves; Renn J Crichlow Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Martin Rupprecht; Lars Grossterlinden; Andreas H Ruecker; Alexander Novo de Oliveira; Kay Sellenschloh; Jakob Nüchtern; Klaus Püschel; Michael Morlock; Johannes Maria Rueger; Wolfgang Lehmann Journal: J Trauma Date: 2011-09
Authors: Henrik Palm; Eva Posner; Hans-Ulrik Ahler-Toftehøj; Peter Siesing; Silas Gylvin; Tobias Aasvang; Kim Holck; Kenneth Brian Holtz Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Matthias Knobe; Philipp Nagel; Klaus-Jürgen Maier; Gertraud Gradl; Benjamin Buecking; Tolga T Sönmez; Ali Modabber; Andreas Prescher; Hans-Christoph Pape Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Juliane Carow; John Bennet Carow; Mark Coburn; Bong-Sung Kim; Benjamin Bücking; Christopher Bliemel; Leo Cornelius Bollheimer; Cornelius Johannes Werner; Jan Philipp Bach; Matthias Knobe Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2018-01-02 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Harald Kurt Widhalm; Richard Arnhold; Hannes Beiglböck; Alexandru Munteanu; Nikolaus Wilhelm Lang; Stefan Hajdu Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2019-10-12 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Ingmar F Rompen; Matthias Knobe; Bjoern-Christian Link; Frank J P Beeres; Ralf Baumgaertner; Nadine Diwersi; Filippo Migliorini; Sven Nebelung; Reto Babst; Bryan J M van de Wall Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 3.240