Nondestructive acoustic modal analysis for assessing bone screw stability: An ex vivo animal study

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Mohammadjavad (Matin) Einafshar, Mohammad Najafidoust, Farshid Bastami, Elie Massaad, Ata Hashemi, Ali Kiapour
{"title":"Nondestructive acoustic modal analysis for assessing bone screw stability: An ex vivo animal study","authors":"Mohammadjavad (Matin) Einafshar,&nbsp;Mohammad Najafidoust,&nbsp;Farshid Bastami,&nbsp;Elie Massaad,&nbsp;Ata Hashemi,&nbsp;Ali Kiapour","doi":"10.1002/jor.25959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Conventional insertion torque and pull-out tests are destructive and unsuitable for clinical bone screw fixation. This study evaluates screw stability using acoustic modal analysis (AMA) and Periotest compared to traditional methods in an ex vivo animal model. Titanium self-tapping screws (STS) and nonself-tapping screws (N-STS) were implanted in the proximal tibia of 12 rabbits. Four testing methods were used to assess screw stability: peak insertion torque (PIT) during implantation, AMA for natural frequency (NF), Periotest for Periotest value (PTV), and pull-out test for peak pullout force (PPF). Euthanization was performed at 0 (primary stability), 4, and 8 weeks (secondary stability). No significant difference in primary stability was found between STS and N-STS except for AMA (STS: NF 2434 ± 67 Hz, N-STS: NF 2572 ± 43 Hz; p = 0.62). Secondary stability increased significantly over time for both screw types (4-week: NF 3687 ± 36 vs. 3408 ± 45 Hz, PTV 1.4 ± 1.6 vs. −1.5 ± 1.8, PPF 236 ± 29 vs. 220 ± 34 N; 8-week: NF 3890 ± 39 vs. 3613 ± 31 Hz, PTV −3.2 ± 2.5 vs. −2 ± 4.3, PPF 248 ± 25 vs. 289 ± 28 N). Higher NF values for given PTV/PPF indicate potential clinical advantages. Significant differences between primary and secondary stabilities suggest osteointegration was mainly achieved in the 4-week group.</p>","PeriodicalId":16650,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Research®","volume":"42 12","pages":"2743-2751"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jor.25959","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Research®","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jor.25959","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Conventional insertion torque and pull-out tests are destructive and unsuitable for clinical bone screw fixation. This study evaluates screw stability using acoustic modal analysis (AMA) and Periotest compared to traditional methods in an ex vivo animal model. Titanium self-tapping screws (STS) and nonself-tapping screws (N-STS) were implanted in the proximal tibia of 12 rabbits. Four testing methods were used to assess screw stability: peak insertion torque (PIT) during implantation, AMA for natural frequency (NF), Periotest for Periotest value (PTV), and pull-out test for peak pullout force (PPF). Euthanization was performed at 0 (primary stability), 4, and 8 weeks (secondary stability). No significant difference in primary stability was found between STS and N-STS except for AMA (STS: NF 2434 ± 67 Hz, N-STS: NF 2572 ± 43 Hz; p = 0.62). Secondary stability increased significantly over time for both screw types (4-week: NF 3687 ± 36 vs. 3408 ± 45 Hz, PTV 1.4 ± 1.6 vs. −1.5 ± 1.8, PPF 236 ± 29 vs. 220 ± 34 N; 8-week: NF 3890 ± 39 vs. 3613 ± 31 Hz, PTV −3.2 ± 2.5 vs. −2 ± 4.3, PPF 248 ± 25 vs. 289 ± 28 N). Higher NF values for given PTV/PPF indicate potential clinical advantages. Significant differences between primary and secondary stabilities suggest osteointegration was mainly achieved in the 4-week group.

Abstract Image

用于评估骨螺钉稳定性的无损声学模态分析:体外动物研究
传统的插入扭矩和拔出测试具有破坏性,不适合临床骨螺钉固定。本研究在体外动物模型中使用声模态分析(AMA)和Periotest与传统方法进行比较,评估螺钉的稳定性。将钛自攻螺钉(STS)和非自攻螺钉(N-STS)植入 12 只兔子的胫骨近端。评估螺钉稳定性的测试方法有四种:植入过程中的峰值插入扭矩(PIT)、AMA 自然频率(NF)、Periotest 值(PTV)和峰值拔出力(PPF)的拔出试验。安乐死分别在 0 周(一级稳定性)、4 周和 8 周(二级稳定性)进行。除了 AMA(STS:NF 2434 ± 67 Hz,N-STS:NF 2572 ± 43 Hz;P = 0.62)外,STS 和 N-STS 的一级稳定性无明显差异。随着时间的推移,两种螺钉类型的二次稳定性都有明显增加(4 周:NF 3687 ± 36 vs NF 2572 ± 43;P = 0.62):NF 3687 ± 36 vs. 3408 ± 45 Hz,PTV 1.4 ± 1.6 vs. -1.5 ± 1.8,PPF 236 ± 29 vs. 220 ± 34 N;8 周:NF 3890 ± 39 vs. 3613 ± 31 Hz,PTV -3.2 ± 2.5 vs. -2 ± 4.3,PPF 248 ± 25 vs. 289 ± 28 N)。给定的 PTV/PPF 的 NF 值越高,表明潜在的临床优势越大。主要稳定性和次要稳定性之间的显著差异表明,骨整合主要是在 4 周组实现的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Orthopaedic Research®
Journal of Orthopaedic Research® 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
3.60%
发文量
261
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthopaedic Research is the forum for the rapid publication of high quality reports of new information on the full spectrum of orthopaedic research, including life sciences, engineering, translational, and clinical studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信