Biomechanical Comparison of Polyaxial-Type Locking Plates and a Fixed-Angle Locking Plate for Internal Fixation of Distal Femur Fractures

被引:68
|
作者
Otto, Randall J. [1 ]
Moed, Berton R. [1 ]
Bledsoe, J. Gary [2 ]
机构
[1] St Louis Univ, Sch Med, Dept Orthopaed Surg, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[2] St Louis Univ, Pk Coll Engn Aviat & Technol, Dept Biomed Engn, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
关键词
polyaxial; distal femur; locking plate; fracture fixation; biomechanics; INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM; BLADE PLATE; SCREW;
D O I
10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181a567c8
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: To test the stability to axial loading of 2 new polyaxial locking screw-plate designs and analyze different angles of screw insertion. The noncontact bridging (NCB) polyaxial locking plate (Zimmer) and the POLYAX plate (DePuy) were compared with a fixed-angle less invasive stabilization system (LISS; Synthes). Methods: Twenty-five synthetic femurs were divided into 5 groups and assigned fixation with the LISS plate (group I), POLYAX plate (groups IIA and IIB), or NCB plate (groups IIIA and IIIB). The polyaxial constructs were divided into parallel and crossed distal condylar screw configurations. Each construct was tested under axial loading and stressed to failure at a displacement rate of 5 mm/min with a preload of 100 N. Outcome measurements included stiffness, load to failure, peak force, and mode of failure, Results: All LISS and POLYAX constructs failed by plastic deformation of the plate, whereas 9 of 10 NCB constructs failed by an intraarticular lateral condyle fracture. No failures occurred at the screwplate interface in either polyaxial constructs. Load to failure of the LISS was 33% greater than the parallel POLYAX (P < 0.01) and 24% greater than the crossed POLYAX (P < 0.01). Load to failure of NCB (parallel and crossed) were 24% greater than the parallel POLYAX (P < 0.01 and P < 0.01, respectively) and 1501,, greater than the crossed POLYAX (P < 0.01 and P = 0.02, respectively). The POLYAX also had significantly lower stiffness and peak force compared with the LISS and NCB. There was no difference between the LISS and NCB with regard to stiffness, load to failure, and peak force. Parallel and crossed polyaxial constructs showed no difference in stiffness or failure loads. Conclusions: There were no failures of either polyaxial screw-plate interface despite large forces and screw angle did not affect the overall strength of these constructs, supporting the biomechanical soundness of both polyaxial device designs under axial loading. However, the POLYAX supported smaller loads compared with the LISS and NCB while under axial loading. In addition, the mode of failure of the NCB plate, creating an intra-articular fracture propagating from the distal posterior screw hole, may be of some concern. Additional testing is needed to determine the clinical importance of the demonstrated differences among these plate designs.
引用
收藏
页码:645 / 652
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Polyaxial locking plate fixation in distal femur fractures: A biomechanical comparison
    Wilkens, Kenneth J.
    Curtiss, Shane
    Lee, Mark A.
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2008, 22 (09) : 624 - 628
  • [2] Results in treatment of distal femur fractures using polyaxial locking plate
    Pascarella, R.
    Bettuzzi, C.
    Bosco, G.
    Leonetti, D.
    Dessi, S.
    Forte, P.
    Amendola, L.
    STRATEGIES IN TRAUMA AND LIMB RECONSTRUCTION, 2014, 9 (01): : 13 - 18
  • [3] Biomechanical comparison of a lateral polyaxial locking plate with a posterolateral polyaxial locking plate applied to the distal fibula
    Hallbauer, Jakob
    Klos, Kajetan
    Rausch, Sascha
    Graefenstein, Andreas
    Wipf, Felix
    Beimel, Claudia
    Hofmann, Gunther
    Mueckley, Thomas
    FOOT AND ANKLE SURGERY, 2014, 20 (03) : 180 - 185
  • [4] Mono- versus polyaxial locking plates in distal femur fractures - a biomechanical comparison of the Non-Contact-Bridging- (NCB) and the PERILOC-plate
    El-Zayat, Bilal Farouk
    Efe, Turgay
    Ruchholtz, Steffen
    Khatib, Salim
    Timmesfeld, Nina
    Krueger, Antonio
    Zettl, Ralph
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2014, 15
  • [5] A biomechanical comparison of locking and nonlocking plates for the fixation of calcaneal fractures
    Redfern, DJ
    Oliveira, MLR
    Campbell, JT
    Belkoff, SM
    FOOT & ANKLE INTERNATIONAL, 2006, 27 (03) : 196 - 201
  • [6] Fixation of Distal Femur Fractures With the Use of Periarticular Tibial Locking Plates
    Friedman, Lisa G. M.
    Maniar, Hemil
    Horwitz, Daniel S.
    TECHNIQUES IN ORTHOPAEDICS, 2024, 39 (02) : 55 - 58
  • [7] Biomechanical analysis of distal femur fracture fixation: Fixed-angle screw-plate construct versus condylar blade plate
    Higgins, Thomas F.
    Pittman, Gavin
    Hines, Jerod
    Bachus, Kent N.
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2007, 21 (01) : 43 - 46
  • [8] Biomechanical evaluation of periprosthetic refractures following distal femur locking plate fixation
    Alexander, Jamie
    Morris, Randal P.
    Kaimrajh, David
    Milne, Edward
    Latta, Loren
    Flink, Adam
    Lindsey, Ronald W.
    INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2015, 46 (12): : 2368 - 2373
  • [9] Comparison of different locking plate fixation methods in distal tibia fractures
    Piatkowski, Krzysztof
    Piekarczyk, Piotr
    Kwiatkowski, Krzysztof
    Przybycien, Mateusz
    Chwedczuk, Bartlomiej
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2015, 39 (11) : 2245 - 2251
  • [10] Comparison of different locking plate fixation methods in distal tibia fractures
    Krzysztof Piątkowski
    Piotr Piekarczyk
    Krzysztof Kwiatkowski
    Mateusz Przybycień
    Bartłomiej Chwedczuk
    International Orthopaedics, 2015, 39 : 2245 - 2251