| Literature DB >> 33976602 |
Muguo Song1, Yongyue Su1, Chuan Li1, Yongqing Xu1.
Abstract
To investigate the mechanical and biomechanical properties of nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) shape memory alloy scaphoid arc nail (NT-SAN) fixator as well as study the surgical method of treating carpal scaphoid fractures and evaluate its clinical efficacy. (1) Static and dynamic bending tests with embedded axial bending fixture were conducted to study the mechanical properties. (2) To evaluate biomechanical strength and fatigue, 32 scaphoid samples were classified into four groups to perform the fixation rigidity test: intramedullary Kirschner fixation (group A), Kirschner straddle nail fixation (group B), screw nail fixation (group C), and NT-SAN fixation (group D). Next, 24 scaphoid waist fracture models were classified to conduct fatigue experiments as follows: Kirschner straddle nail fixation (group E), screw nail fixation (group F), and NT-SAN fixation (group G). (3) The Krimmer score chart was used for clinical evaluations. (1) NT-SAN showed excellent mechanical performance and a long lifespan. (2) NT-SAN was fixated with a strong intensity and an anti-fatigue outcome. (3) Ninety-eight interviewed patients were satisfied with the therapeutic effects of the arc nail (satisfaction rate: 95.92%). The designed strength and hardness of NT-SAN corresponded with the anatomical characteristics of the scaphoid, and the designed mechanical properties met the biomechanical requirements of a scaphoid fracture. The fatigue strength can meet the requirements of bone healing after the scaphoid fracture. Clinical trials on NT-SAN scaphoid fracture treatment have shown that the surgery is simple and the clinical results are satisfactory. The therapeutic level of NT-SAN is III; thus, it is worth promoting.Entities:
Keywords: Ni‐Ti memory alloy; arc nail; mechanical properties; scaphoid
Year: 2021 PMID: 33976602 PMCID: PMC8092983 DOI: 10.1002/elsc.202000055
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eng Life Sci ISSN: 1618-0240 Impact factor: 2.678
FIGURE 1Physical map of the scaphoid screw fixation
FIGURE 2Diagram of fixing the carpal scaphoid fracture using NT‐SAN
FIGURE 3(A) Schematic diagrams of tensile bending using static tests; (B) Schematic diagrams of tensile bending using dynamic tests
Results of static combined tension and bending test
| Specimen | Yield moment (Nmm) | Yield displacement (mm) | Ultimate load (N) | Ultimate displacement (mm) | Stiffness (N/mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | 208 | 1.2 | 1.659 | 6.9 | 30.9 |
| 1.2 | 212 | 1.2 | 1.769 | 8.4 | 32.6 |
| 1.3 | 201 | 1.2 | 2.060 | 6.8 | 29.5 |
| 1.4 | 210 | 1.3 | 1.436 | 7.5 | 29.3 |
| 1.5 | 195 | 1.2 | 1.782 | 8.1 | 28.8 |
| Mean | 205 | 1.2 | 1.741 | 7.5 | 30.2 |
| Std Dev. | 7 | 0.1 | 2.26 | 0.7 | 1.5 |
Results of dynamic combined tension and bending test
| Specimen | Min moment (Nmm) | Max. moment (mm) | Cycles | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.6 | 40 | 400 | 6233 | Fracture |
| 1.7 | 30 | 300 | 8190 | Fracture |
| 1.8 | 20 | 200 | 21790 | Fracture |
| 1.9 | 10 | 100 | 1000000 | No fracture |
| 1.10 | 15 | 150 | 58956 | Fracture |
The traction force at 1 and 2 mm interfractmentary displacements (n = 8, N, ± s)
| The traction force | ||
|---|---|---|
| Group | 1 mm | 2 mm |
| A | 15.18 ± 3.55 | 20.28 ± 12.09 |
| B | 36.04 ± 4.30 | 75.95 ± 47.64 |
| C | 64.84 ± 11.62 | 120.91 ± 26.68 |
| D | 65.84 ± 12.22 | 130.21 ± 31.55 |
Compared with Group D, P < 0.05.
The separated distance of the interfractments of scaphoid (n = 8, N, ± s)
| The traction force (N) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | 100 | 500 | 1500 | 2000 |
| A | 1.19 ± 0.23 | 1.76 ± 0.37 | 2.21 ± 0.33 | 2.49 ± 0.32 |
| B | 0.46 ± 0.16 | 0.92 ± 0.22 | 1.44 ± 0.38 | 1.89 ± 0.35 |
| C | 0.29 ± 0.08 | 0.37 ± 0.09 | 0.44 ± 0.10 | 0.49 ± 0.12 |
Compared with Group D, P < 0.05.
The distance and “step” displacements of the interfractment of scaphoid
| The traction force (N) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | 100 | 500 | 1500 | 2000 | ||||||||
| I | II | III | I | II | III | I | II | III | I | II | III | |
| E | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 3 |
| F | 7 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 |
| G | 8 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 0 |
FIGURE 4Surgical incision
FIGURE 5Scaphoid fracture operated in a layer‐by‐layer manner
FIGURE 6Fixed scaphoid fracture
FIGURE 7(A) Typical preoperative and postoperative cases; (B) Typical preoperative and postoperative cases; (C) Typical preoperative and postoperative cases; (D) Typical preoperative and postoperative cases
Comparison of wrist flexion, dorsiflexion activity and grip strength in patients before and after treatment ( ± s)
| Case | Dorsiflexion activity (level) | Wrist flexion (M) | Local pain (point) | Grip strength (N) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before operation | 68 | 39.97 ± 4.58 | 31.08 ± 3.94 | 11.06 ± 1.14 | 19.37 ± 21.35 |
| After operation | 68 | 67.12 ± 6.17 | 49.12 ± 5.07 | 14.08 ± 1.53 | 39.84 ± 19.87 |