Literature DB >> 33558603

Development and first biomechanical validation of a score to predict bone implant interface stability based on clinical qCT scans.

Dirk Wähnert1,2, Andre Frank3, Michael J Raschke3, Dominic Gehweiler3,4, Johanna Ueberberg3, Lukas F Heilmann3, Odile Sauzet5.   

Abstract

Sufficient implant anchoring in osteoporotic bone is one major challenge in trauma and orthopedic surgery. In these cases, preoperative planning of osteosynthesis is becoming increasingly important. This study presents the development and first biomechanical validation of a bone-implant-anchorage score based on clinical routine quantitative computer tomography (qCT) scans. 10 pairs of fresh frozen femora (mean age 77.4 years) underwent clinical qCT scans after placing 3 referential screws (for matching with the second scan). Afterwards, three 4.5 mm cortical screws (DePuy Synthes, Zuchwil, Switzerland) were placed in each distal femur in the dia-metaphyseal transition followed by the second CT scan. The femur was segmented using thresholding and its outer shape was visualized as a surface model. A 3D model of the cortex screw in STL format was used to model the screw surface precisely. For each femur, the 3 cortex screw models were exactly positioned at the locations previously determined using the second CT scan. The BMD value was calculated at the center of each triangle as an interpolation from the measured values at the three vertices (triangle corners) in the CT. Scores are based on the sum of all the triangles' areas multiplied by their BMD values. Four different scores were calculated. A screw pull-out test was performed until loss of resistance. A quadratic model adequately describes the relation between all the scores and pull-out values. The square of the best score explains just fewer than 70% of the total variance of the pull-out values and the standardized residual which were approximately normally distributed. In addition, there was a significant correlation between this score and the peak pull-out force (p < 0.001). The coefficient of determination was 0.82. The presented score has the potential to improve preoperative planning by adding the mechanical to the anatomical dimension when planning screw placement.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33558603     DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-82788-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  15 in total

Review 1.  [Biomechanics of implant augmentation].

Authors:  M Windolf
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 2.  [Treatment of patients with fragility fractures].

Authors:  B Bücking; C Neuerburg; M Knobe; U Liener
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Concept of variable angle locking--evolution and mechanical evaluation of a recent technology.

Authors:  Mark Lenz; Dieter Wahl; Boyko Gueorguiev; Jesse B Jupiter; Stephan Marcel Perren
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  Biomechanical comparison of augmented versus non-augmented sacroiliac screws in a novel hemi-pelvis test model.

Authors:  Niklas Grüneweller; Michael J Raschke; Ivan Zderic; Daniel Widmer; Dirk Wähnert; Boyko Gueorguiev; Robert Geoff Richards; Thomas Fuchs; Markus Windolf
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 3.494

5.  Inability of Older Adult Patients with Hip Fracture to Maintain Postoperative Weight-Bearing Restrictions.

Authors:  Christian Kammerlander; Daniel Pfeufer; Leonard Adolf Lisitano; Stefan Mehaffey; Wolfgang Böcker; Carl Neuerburg
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Cement augmentation of the Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA) - A multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Christian Kammerlander; Einar S Hem; Tim Klopfer; Florian Gebhard; An Sermon; Michael Dietrich; Olaf Bach; Yoram Weil; Reto Babst; Michael Blauth
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2018-04-22       Impact factor: 2.586

7.  The potential of implant augmentation in the treatment of osteoporotic distal femur fractures: a biomechanical study.

Authors:  D Wähnert; J H Lange; M Schulze; S Lenschow; R Stange; M J Raschke
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 2.586

Review 8.  When is the stability of a fracture fixation limited by osteoporotic bone?

Authors:  Lukas Konstantinidis; Peter Helwig; Anja Hirschmüller; Elia Langenmair; Norbert P Südkamp; Peter Augat
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 2.586

9.  Biomechanical in vitro assessment of screw augmentation in locked plating of proximal humerus fractures.

Authors:  Götz Röderer; Alexander Scola; Werner Schmölz; Florian Gebhard; Markus Windolf; Ladina Hofmann-Fliri
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 2.586

10.  Proximal cut-out in pertrochanteric femural fracture.

Authors:  Roberto Valentini; Marcellino Martino; Gianluca Piovan; Giovanni De Fabrizio; Giovanni Fancellu
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2014-08-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.