首页> 外文期刊>BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders >A biomechanical comparison of two screw fixation methods in a Letenneur type I Hoffa fracture
【24h】

A biomechanical comparison of two screw fixation methods in a Letenneur type I Hoffa fracture

机译:左旋叶片叶片两种螺钉固定方法的生物力学比较

获取原文
           

摘要

BACKGROUND:The treatment of Hoffa fractures is challenging, for which the ideal fixation and approach are still controversial. Osteosynthesis with plate or screws fixation in different trajectories have been described in previous literature. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical strength and stability of two types of screw trajectories used to stabilize displaced coronal fractures of the lateral femoral condyle.METHODS:Sixteen synthetic femurs (Sawbones Pacific Research Laboratories, Vashon, WA) were divided into two groups. A vertical osteotomy was performed to mimic a Letenneur type I Hoffa fracture. Group A (n?=?8) was fixed with screw in anteroposterior direction (A-P) screws. Group B (n?=?8) was fixed with crossed screws. Both groups were tested with a nondestructive axial compression aligned with the femur axis. After that, 10,000 cyclic loading tests were applied to the specimen with a force ranging between 200 to 600?N, and the interfragmental displacement was recorded, respectively, after 10, 100, 1000 and 10,000?cycles. Finally, a destructive axial compression test was applied until catastrophic failure.RESULTS:There were no statistical between-group differences in regard to the average axial stiffness, interfragmental displacement, and ultimate failure load. The average axial stiffness of the A-P screw was comparable to that of the crossed screw (361?±?113?N/mm vs. 379?±?65?N/mm, p?=?0.753). All specimens completed the entire cyclic loading test without catastrophic failure, and the interfragmental displacement after loading for 10,000?cycles was 1.36?±?0.40?mm for the A-P screw and 1.29?±?0.61?mm for the crossed screw, there were no statistical differences between the groups (p?=?0.823). The average ultimate failure loads for the A-P and crossed screws were 1214?±?127?N and 1109?±?156?N, respectively (p?=?0.172).CONCLUSIONS:Based on our in vitro study, the crossed screws can provide comparable mechanical performance as traditional A-P screws in Hoffa fracture fixation. Considering the screws trajectories are commonly determined by the choice of surgical approach, the current study provides support from a biomechanical perspective for the application of crossed screws in direct lateral approach.
机译:背景:霍巴骨折的治疗是挑战,其理想的固定和方法仍然存在争议。在以前的文献中已经描述了不同轨迹中的板或螺钉固定的骨质合成。本研究的目的是比较两种类型的螺旋轨迹的生物力学强度和稳定性,用于稳定外侧股骨髁的冠状骨折。方法:十六种合成股份(锯木屋太平洋研究实验室,Vashon,WA)分为两个团体。进行垂直截骨术以模仿样品型I Hoffa骨折。 A组(n?=?8)用前后方向(A-P)螺钉固定。 B组(N?=?8)用交叉的螺钉固定。用与股骨轴线对齐的非破坏性轴向压缩来测试两组。之后,将10,000个循环加载试验施加到试样,其力范围在200至600℃之间,分别在10,100,1000和10,000之后记录杂交位移。最后,将破坏性轴向压缩测试施加到灾难性失败。结果:关于平均轴向刚度,杂交位移和最终故障负荷的组中没有统计学差异。 A-P螺杆的平均轴向刚度与交叉螺钉的平均轴向刚度相当(361?±113Ω·n / mm vs. 379?±65?n / mm,p?= 0.753)。所有标本都完成了整个循环加载试验而没有灾难性的失败,并且装载10,000后的杂交位移为1.36?±0.40?mm用于AP螺钉,1.29?±0.61Ω·±0.61Ω·mm为交叉螺钉,没有组之间的统计差异(p?= 0.823)。 AP和交叉螺钉的平均终极故障负载分别为1214?±127?n和1109?±156?±156?n,p?= 0.172)。链接:基于我们的体外研究,交叉的螺钉可以提供可比较的机械性能作为霍夫巴断裂固定的传统AP螺钉。考虑到螺钉轨迹通常通过选择手术方法来确定,目前的研究提供了一种从生物力学视角来的支持,以便在直接横向方法中施加交叉螺钉。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号