| Literature DB >> 30693406 |
Roberto Luigi Cazzato1, Guillaume Koch2, Julien Garnon2, Nitin Ramamurthy3, Jérémie Jégu4, Philippe Clavert5, Afshin Gangi2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteoplasty has been discouraged in long bones. However, despite a substantial lack of pre-clinical biomechanical tests, multiple clinical studies have implemented a wide range of techniques to optimise long bone osteoplasty. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the biomechanical properties of osteoplasty alone and in combination with Kirschner wires (K-wires) in a cadaveric human diaphyseal model undergoing 3-point bending stress.Entities:
Keywords: Bone wires; Diaphyses; Fractures (bone); Polymethyl methacrylate
Year: 2019 PMID: 30693406 PMCID: PMC6890912 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-018-0082-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol Exp ISSN: 2509-9280
Published studies reporting on different consolidative techniques in long bones
| First author [reference] | Journal | Year | Number of patients | Target bone | Type of intervention | Secondary fractures (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cazzato [ | Eur Radiol | 2014 | 51 | Long bones | Osteoplasty | 9.1 |
| Premat [ | Eur Radiol | 2017 | 18 | Proximal femur | Spindles + osteoplasty | 0 |
| Kelekis [ | CVIR | 2016 | 12 | Long bones | 25–50 stainless steel micro-needles + osteoplasty | 0 |
| Liu [ | Eur Radiol | 2016 | 36 | Long bones | Osteoplasty (19 patients) | 26.3 |
| Osteoplasty + cement-filled catheter in the medullary canal (17 patients) | 0 | |||||
| Tian [ | CVIR | 2014 | 40 | Proximal femur | Osteoplasty (19 patients) | 23.8 |
| Osteoplasty + internal fixation with bone trocars stylets (21 patients) | 0 | |||||
| He [ | JVIR | 2014 | 6 | Proximal femur | Osteoplasty + internal fixation (bone trocars stylets) | 0 |
| Cazzato [ | Eur J Radiol | 2017 | 11 | Proximal femur | Osteosynthesis | 0 |
| Lin [ | Surg Oncol | 2015 | 12 | Proximal femur | Osteosynthesis with modified hollow-perforated screws and osteoplasty | 8.3 |
| Cornelis [ | J Orthop Surg Res | 2017 | 10 | Proximal femur | Y-STRUT® device | 10 |
| Kim [ | Surg Oncol | 2011 | 15 | Humerus | Ender nail fixation and osteoplasty | NR |
| Kim [ | Surg Oncol | 2014 | 15 | Femur and tibia | Flexible nailing and osteoplasty | NR |
Fig. 1Fluoroscopic image illustrating a bone sample from each experimental group
Fig. 2Schematic representation of the 3-point bending test protocol. F force
Fig. 3Schematic representation of a B0 fracture type according to a modified Müller AO classification used in the present study
Baseline characteristics of the experimental specimens
| Group | Number of inferior specimens | Number of superior specimens | Number of right specimens | Number of left specimens | Median specimen length (cm, 25th–75th percentile) | Median specimen density (HU, 25th–75th percentile) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 18.375 (17.9–19.25) | 1621 (1571–1652) |
| 2 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 18.375 (17.6–19.25) | 1600 (1550–1613) |
| 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 18.325 (18–19.25) | 1606.5 (1550–1632) |
HU Hounsfield units
Fig. 4Force/displacement curves. x-axis reports specimen displacement (mm); y-axis reports the fracture loading force (N). N Newton
Fracture load and Young’s modulus across experimental groups
| Group | Fracture load (N) | Young’s modulus (N/m2) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Median (25th–75th percentile) | Mean (SD) | Median (25th–75th percentile) | |
| 1 | 1077.6 (370.16) | 1076 (807–1341) | 397.15 (140.07) | 361.39 (300.65–514.07) |
| 2 | 1221.5 (338.12) | 1166 (1091 – 1391) | 444.53 (153.48) | 497.88 (309.77–556.35) |
| 3 | 1230 (292.58) | 1280.5 (1119 –1448) | 430.73 (140.14) | 392.23 (344.59–547.15) |
N Newton, SD standard deviation
Type of fractures according to the modified Müller AO Trauma Foundation Long bone Fracture classification (Reference [19])
| Group | A0 | A1 | A2 | A3 | B0 | B1 | B2 | B3 | C0 | C1 | C2 | C3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 0 | 2 | 8 | 4 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Fig. 5Schematic representation of flexible (left) and bundle (right) intramedullary nailing techniques