Huy Le Quang1, Werner Schmoelz1, Richard A Lindtner1, Dietmar Dammerer2, Peter Schwendinger1, Dietmar Krappinger3. 1. Department of Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, Innsbruck, Austria. 3. Department of Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria. Electronic address: dietmar.krappinger@tirol-kliniken.at.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Open reduction and internal fixation of both columns is considered the treatment of choice for displaced anterior column with posterior hemitransverse (ACPHT) fractures in non-geriatric patients. Plate fixation of one column combined with lag screw fixation of the other column allows to decrease operative time and approach-related morbidity compared to conventional both column plating. The aim of this biomechanical study was to evaluate whether single column plate plus other column lag screw fixation confers similar stability to both column plate fixation. Physiological loads were simulated using both the single-leg stance (SLS) as well as the sit-to-stand (STS) loading protocols. METHODS: A clinically relevant ACPHT fracture model was created using fourth-generation composite hemipelves. Fractures were stabilized with three different fixation constructs: (1) anterior column plate plus posterior column screw fixation (AP+PCS), posterior column plate plus anterior column screw fixation (PP+ACS) and anterior column plate plus posterior column plate fixation (AP+PP). Specimens were loaded from 50 to 750 N with a ramp of 100 N/s. Fracture gap motion (FGM) and relative interfragmentary rotation (RIFR) between the three main fracture fragments were assessed under loads of 750 N using an optical 3D measurement system. RESULTS: STS loading generally resulted in higher mean FGM and RIFR than STS loading in the AP+PCS and AP+PP groups, while no significant differences were found in the PP+ACS group. Compared to conventional both column plate fixation (AP+PP), PP+ACS displayed significantly higher FGM and RIFR between the iliac wing and the posterior column during SLS loading. No significant differences in FGM and RIFR were identified between the AP+PCS and the AP+PP group. CONCLUSION: Overall, single column plate plus other column lag screw fixation conferred similar stability to conventional both column plate fixation. From a clinical point of view, AP+PCS appears to be the most attractive alternative to conventional AP+PP for internal fixation of ACPHT fractures.
OBJECTIVES: Open reduction and internal fixation of both columns is considered the treatment of choice for displaced anterior column with posterior hemitransverse (ACPHT) fractures in non-geriatric patients. Plate fixation of one column combined with lag screw fixation of the other column allows to decrease operative time and approach-related morbidity compared to conventional both column plating. The aim of this biomechanical study was to evaluate whether single column plate plus other column lag screw fixation confers similar stability to both column plate fixation. Physiological loads were simulated using both the single-leg stance (SLS) as well as the sit-to-stand (STS) loading protocols. METHODS: A clinically relevant ACPHT fracture model was created using fourth-generation composite hemipelves. Fractures were stabilized with three different fixation constructs: (1) anterior column plate plus posterior column screw fixation (AP+PCS), posterior column plate plus anterior column screw fixation (PP+ACS) and anterior column plate plus posterior column plate fixation (AP+PP). Specimens were loaded from 50 to 750 N with a ramp of 100 N/s. Fracture gap motion (FGM) and relative interfragmentary rotation (RIFR) between the three main fracture fragments were assessed under loads of 750 N using an optical 3D measurement system. RESULTS: STS loading generally resulted in higher mean FGM and RIFR than STS loading in the AP+PCS and AP+PP groups, while no significant differences were found in the PP+ACS group. Compared to conventional both column plate fixation (AP+PP), PP+ACS displayed significantly higher FGM and RIFR between the iliac wing and the posterior column during SLS loading. No significant differences in FGM and RIFR were identified between the AP+PCS and the AP+PP group. CONCLUSION: Overall, single column plate plus other column lag screw fixation conferred similar stability to conventional both column plate fixation. From a clinical point of view, AP+PCS appears to be the most attractive alternative to conventional AP+PP for internal fixation of ACPHT fractures.
Authors: Markus A Küper; Alexander Trulson; Jonas Johannink; Bernhard Hirt; Artur Leis; Max Hoßfeld; Tina Histing; Steven C Herath; Bastian Amend Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2022-02-11