[Comparison of the stability of dual INFIX and INFIX combined with sacroiliac screw fixation for C1 type pelvic fractures].

Q4 Medicine
Dong-Qing Cui, Jin-Jie Wei, Hai-Yu Sun
{"title":"[Comparison of the stability of dual INFIX and INFIX combined with sacroiliac screw fixation for C1 type pelvic fractures].","authors":"Dong-Qing Cui, Jin-Jie Wei, Hai-Yu Sun","doi":"10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20240300","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the biomechanical stability of dual anterior subcutaneous internal fixation (INFIX) in pelvic C1 fractures by finite element analysis, and to compare it with INFIX combined with sacroiliac screws to determine whether it is sufficient to replace the combined fixation of anterior and posterior rings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The pelvic CT data of a 43-year-old female volunteer were imported into the computer and the normal pelvic model and pelvic C1 fractures model were constructed using Mimics, Workbench and other software. The latter was fixed with dual INFIX and INFIX combined with sacroiliac screws, respectively. First, the effectiveness of the normal pelvic model in anatomical landmarks, stress conduction and displacement distribution was verified. Then, a vertical downward load of 500 N was applied to the two internal fixation models to simulate the standing and sitting positions of the human body, and the displacement of the anterior and posterior ring fractures ends, the stress of the internal fixation and the stress of the nail channel in the bone were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The model passed the validity verification. The maximum displacement of the anterior and posterior ring fractures in the standing dual INFIX group were 0.861 mm and 4.128 mm, respectively, which were both smaller than the 0.152 mm and 0.293 mm in the combined fixation group. The displacement of the posterior ring fractures in the sitting dual INFIX group was 3.757 mm, which was larger than the 0.560 mm in the combined fixation group, while the maximum displacement of the anterior ring fractures was 0.221 mm, which was not much different from the 0.194 mm in the combined fixation group. The maximum stress of internal fixation in the standing dual INFIX group was greater than that in the combined fixation group, while the opposite was true in the sitting position. The maximum stress of each internal fixation was lower than the yield strength of titanium alloy 790 MPa. The maximum stress of the nail channel in the standing and sitting daul INFIX groups was lower than that in the combined fixation group, and the stress of all nail channels was lower than the strength limit of bone 290 to 540 MPa.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The stability of dual INFIX fixation in anterior and posterior ring fractures is generally inferior to that of INFIX combined with sacroiliac screw fixation. Although simple dual INFIX fixation can share part of the load for the posterior ring, the posterior ring will still have a large displacement, so the fixation of the posterior ring is very important. In addition, the fixation strength and stability of dual INFIX in the anterior ring are better than INFIX. When INFIX cannot provide sufficient strength to stabilize the anterior ring fractures, dual INFIX will be a good choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":23964,"journal":{"name":"Zhongguo gu shang = China journal of orthopaedics and traumatology","volume":"37 11","pages":"1107-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zhongguo gu shang = China journal of orthopaedics and traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20240300","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the biomechanical stability of dual anterior subcutaneous internal fixation (INFIX) in pelvic C1 fractures by finite element analysis, and to compare it with INFIX combined with sacroiliac screws to determine whether it is sufficient to replace the combined fixation of anterior and posterior rings.

Methods: The pelvic CT data of a 43-year-old female volunteer were imported into the computer and the normal pelvic model and pelvic C1 fractures model were constructed using Mimics, Workbench and other software. The latter was fixed with dual INFIX and INFIX combined with sacroiliac screws, respectively. First, the effectiveness of the normal pelvic model in anatomical landmarks, stress conduction and displacement distribution was verified. Then, a vertical downward load of 500 N was applied to the two internal fixation models to simulate the standing and sitting positions of the human body, and the displacement of the anterior and posterior ring fractures ends, the stress of the internal fixation and the stress of the nail channel in the bone were collected.

Results: The model passed the validity verification. The maximum displacement of the anterior and posterior ring fractures in the standing dual INFIX group were 0.861 mm and 4.128 mm, respectively, which were both smaller than the 0.152 mm and 0.293 mm in the combined fixation group. The displacement of the posterior ring fractures in the sitting dual INFIX group was 3.757 mm, which was larger than the 0.560 mm in the combined fixation group, while the maximum displacement of the anterior ring fractures was 0.221 mm, which was not much different from the 0.194 mm in the combined fixation group. The maximum stress of internal fixation in the standing dual INFIX group was greater than that in the combined fixation group, while the opposite was true in the sitting position. The maximum stress of each internal fixation was lower than the yield strength of titanium alloy 790 MPa. The maximum stress of the nail channel in the standing and sitting daul INFIX groups was lower than that in the combined fixation group, and the stress of all nail channels was lower than the strength limit of bone 290 to 540 MPa.

Conclusion: The stability of dual INFIX fixation in anterior and posterior ring fractures is generally inferior to that of INFIX combined with sacroiliac screw fixation. Although simple dual INFIX fixation can share part of the load for the posterior ring, the posterior ring will still have a large displacement, so the fixation of the posterior ring is very important. In addition, the fixation strength and stability of dual INFIX in the anterior ring are better than INFIX. When INFIX cannot provide sufficient strength to stabilize the anterior ring fractures, dual INFIX will be a good choice.

[双 INFIX 与 INFIX 结合骶髂螺钉固定治疗 C1 型骨盆骨折的稳定性比较]。
目的通过有限元分析评估双前路皮下内固定(INFIX)在骨盆C1骨折中的生物力学稳定性,并与INFIX联合骶髂螺钉进行比较,以确定其是否足以取代前后环联合固定:方法:将一名 43 岁女性志愿者的骨盆 CT 数据导入计算机,使用 Mimics、Workbench 等软件建立正常骨盆模型和骨盆 C1 骨折模型。后者分别使用双 INFIX 和 INFIX 结合骶髂螺钉进行固定。首先,验证了正常骨盆模型在解剖标志、应力传导和位移分布方面的有效性。然后,在两个内固定模型上施加 500 N 的垂直向下载荷,模拟人体的站立和坐姿,收集前后环形骨折端位移、内固定应力和钉道在骨中的应力:结果:模型通过了有效性验证。站立双 INFIX 组前后环骨折的最大位移分别为 0.861 mm 和 4.128 mm,均小于联合固定组的 0.152 mm 和 0.293 mm。坐位双 INFIX 组的后环骨折位移为 3.757 毫米,大于联合固定组的 0.560 毫米,而前环骨折的最大位移为 0.221 毫米,与联合固定组的 0.194 毫米相差不大。站立双 INFIX 组内固定的最大应力大于联合固定组,而坐位则相反。每种内固定的最大应力均低于钛合金的屈服强度 790 兆帕。站位和坐位双 INFIX 固定组的钉道最大应力低于联合固定组,所有钉道的应力均低于骨的强度极限 290 至 540 兆帕:结论:在前后环骨折中,双 INFIX 固定的稳定性普遍低于 INFIX 联合骶髂螺钉固定。虽然简单的双 INFIX 固定可以分担后环的部分负荷,但后环仍会有较大的移位,因此后环的固定非常重要。此外,双 INFIX 在前环的固定强度和稳定性均优于 INFIX。当 INFIX 无法提供足够的强度来稳定前环骨折时,双 INFIX 将是一个不错的选择。
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
189
×
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