Biomechanical comparison of locking femoral neck plate versus cannulated screws with or without a medial buttress plate in Pauwels type 3 femoral neck fractures.

Yilmaz Onder, Tugrul Bulut, Osman Nuri Eroglu, Samet Ciklacandir, Yalcin Isler
{"title":"Biomechanical comparison of locking femoral neck plate versus cannulated screws with or without a medial buttress plate in Pauwels type 3 femoral neck fractures.","authors":"Yilmaz Onder, Tugrul Bulut, Osman Nuri Eroglu, Samet Ciklacandir, Yalcin Isler","doi":"10.5152/j.aott.2024.24076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the locking femoral neck plate (LFNP) can be an alternative fixation method to the cannulated screws with a medial buttress plate. For this purpose, we compared biomechanically the LFNP and cannulated screws with or without a medial buttress plate in Pauwels type 3 femoral neck fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A vertical fracture model was created at an 80-degree angle to the femoral neck in 28 synthetic bone models. The models were randomly divided into 4 groups, each containing 7 bones each. The bone fracture models were fixed with 3 parallel cannulated screws in group 1, 3 parallel cannulated screws combined with a medial buttress plate in group 2, LFNP in group 3, LFNP combined with a medial buttress plate in group 4. The stability of the specimens was tested biomechanically at a 7° valgus inclination to simulate normal 2-legged weight-bearing through an anatomical femur. The forces corresponding to 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 1.5 mm, and 2 mm displacement and failure loads were calculated in all groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The axial load values corresponding to 4 di!erent fracture displacements and the failure load values of the groups were compared, group 1 was significantly weaker (P < .05 for each) while group 4 was significantly stronger (P < .05 for each) compared to the other groups. There was no statistically significant di!erence between group 2 and group 3 (P > .05 for each).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this biomechanical study showed that the LFNP fixation system provided su\"cient biomechanical stability for unstable Pauwels type 3 femoral neck fractures. The biomechanical performance of LFNP was similar to that of cannulated screws with medial buttress plate and better than that of cannulated screws alone. This suggests that LFNP can be a promising stable alternative fixation method to cannulated screws with a medial buttress plate in unstable femoral neck fractures.</p>","PeriodicalId":93854,"journal":{"name":"Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica","volume":"58 6","pages":"313-317"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11740239/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2024.24076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the locking femoral neck plate (LFNP) can be an alternative fixation method to the cannulated screws with a medial buttress plate. For this purpose, we compared biomechanically the LFNP and cannulated screws with or without a medial buttress plate in Pauwels type 3 femoral neck fractures.

Methods: A vertical fracture model was created at an 80-degree angle to the femoral neck in 28 synthetic bone models. The models were randomly divided into 4 groups, each containing 7 bones each. The bone fracture models were fixed with 3 parallel cannulated screws in group 1, 3 parallel cannulated screws combined with a medial buttress plate in group 2, LFNP in group 3, LFNP combined with a medial buttress plate in group 4. The stability of the specimens was tested biomechanically at a 7° valgus inclination to simulate normal 2-legged weight-bearing through an anatomical femur. The forces corresponding to 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 1.5 mm, and 2 mm displacement and failure loads were calculated in all groups.

Results: The axial load values corresponding to 4 di!erent fracture displacements and the failure load values of the groups were compared, group 1 was significantly weaker (P < .05 for each) while group 4 was significantly stronger (P < .05 for each) compared to the other groups. There was no statistically significant di!erence between group 2 and group 3 (P > .05 for each).

Conclusion: The results of this biomechanical study showed that the LFNP fixation system provided su"cient biomechanical stability for unstable Pauwels type 3 femoral neck fractures. The biomechanical performance of LFNP was similar to that of cannulated screws with medial buttress plate and better than that of cannulated screws alone. This suggests that LFNP can be a promising stable alternative fixation method to cannulated screws with a medial buttress plate in unstable femoral neck fractures.

锁定股骨颈钢板与带或不带内侧支撑钢板的空心螺钉治疗Pauwels型3型股骨颈骨折的生物力学比较
目的:本研究的目的是评估锁定股骨颈钢板(LFNP)是否可以作为中空螺钉与内侧支撑板的替代固定方法。为此,我们比较了带或不带内侧支撑板的LFNP和空心螺钉治疗Pauwels型3型股骨颈骨折的生物力学性能。方法:在28个人工骨模型中建立与股骨颈成80度角的垂直骨折模型。模型随机分为4组,每组7块骨。1组用3枚平行空心螺钉固定骨折模型,2组用3枚平行空心螺钉联合内侧支撑板固定骨折模型,3组用LFNP固定骨折模型,4组用LFNP联合内侧支撑板固定骨折模型。在7°外翻倾角下对标本进行生物力学稳定性测试,以模拟通过解剖股骨正常的两条腿负重。计算各组0.5 mm、1 mm、1.5 mm、2 mm位移和破坏荷载所对应的力。结果:轴向载荷值对应4di !比较各组的事件骨折位移和破坏载荷值,与其他组相比,1组明显较弱(P < 0.05), 4组明显较强(P < 0.05)。没有统计学上显著的di!第2组与第3组比较差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论:本生物力学研究结果表明,LFNP固定系统为不稳定的Pauwels型3型股骨颈骨折提供了良好的生物力学稳定性。LFNP的生物力学性能与内侧支板空心螺钉相似,优于单独空心螺钉。这表明LFNP是治疗不稳定股骨颈骨折的一种有前途的稳定的替代固定方法,可以替代空心螺钉和内侧支撑钢板。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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