The Relationship Between Lesion Size and Load to Failure After Stabilization of Simulated Metastatic Lesions of the Proximal Femur.

Q3 Medicine
The Iowa orthopaedic journal Pub Date : 2022-06-01
Arham Pasha, Jessica Goetz, Marc Brouillette, Palani Permeswaran, Trevor R Gulbrandsen, Benjamin J Miller
{"title":"The Relationship Between Lesion Size and Load to Failure After Stabilization of Simulated Metastatic Lesions of the Proximal Femur.","authors":"Arham Pasha,&nbsp;Jessica Goetz,&nbsp;Marc Brouillette,&nbsp;Palani Permeswaran,&nbsp;Trevor R Gulbrandsen,&nbsp;Benjamin J Miller","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As overall cancer survival continues to improve, the incidence of metastatic lesions to the bone continues to increase. The subsequent skeletal related events that can occur with osseous metastasis can be debilitating. Complete and impending pathologic femur fractures are common with patients often requiring operative fixation. However, the efficacy of an intramedullary nail construct, on providing stability, continue to be debated. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to utilize a synthetic femur model to determine 1) how proximal femur defect size and cortical breach impact femur load to failure (strength) and stiffness, and 2) and how the utilization of an IMN, in a prophylactic fashion, subsequently alters the overall strength and stiffness of the proximal femur.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 21 synthetic femur models were divided into four groups: 1) intact (no defect), 2) 2 cm defect, 3) 2.5 cm defect, and 4) 4 cm defect. An IMN was inserted in half of the femur specimens that had a defect present. This procedure was performed using standard antegrade technique. Specimens were mechanically tested in offset torsion. Force-displacement curves were utilized to determine each constructs load to failure and overall torsional stiffness. The ultimate load to failure and construct stiffness of the synthetic femurs with defects were compared to the intact synthetic femur, while the femurs with the placement of the IMN were directly compared to the synthetic femurs with matching defect size.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The size of the defect invertedly correlated with the load the failure and overall stiffness. There was no difference in load to failure or overall stiffness when comparing intact models with no defect and the 2 cm defect group (p=0.98, p=0.43). The 2.5 cm, and 4.5 cm defect groups demonstrated significant difference in both load to failure and overall stiffness when compared to intact models with results demonstrating 1313 N (95% CI: 874-1752 N; p<0.001) and 104 N/mm (95% CI: 98-110 N/mm; p=0.03) in the 2.5 cm defect models, and 512 N (95% CI: 390-634 N, p<0.001) and 21 N/mm (95% CI: 9-33 N/mm, p<0.001) in the models with a 4 cm defect. Compared to the groups with defects, the placement an IMN increased overall stiffness in the 2.5 cm defect group (125 N/mm; 95% CI:114-136 N/mm; p=0.003), but not load to failure (p=0.91). In the 4 cm defect group, there was a significant increase in load to failure (1067 N; 95% CI: 835-1300 N; p=0.002) and overall stiffness (57 N/mm; 95% CI:46-69 N/mm; p=0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Prophylactic IMN fixation significantly improved failure load and overall stiffness in the group with the largest cortical defects, but still demonstrated a failure loads less than 50% of the intact model. This investigation suggests that a cortical breach causes a loss of strength that is not completely restored by intramedullary fixation. <b>Level of Evidence: II</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":35582,"journal":{"name":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","volume":" ","pages":"249-254"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9210428/pdf/IOJ-42-01-249.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As overall cancer survival continues to improve, the incidence of metastatic lesions to the bone continues to increase. The subsequent skeletal related events that can occur with osseous metastasis can be debilitating. Complete and impending pathologic femur fractures are common with patients often requiring operative fixation. However, the efficacy of an intramedullary nail construct, on providing stability, continue to be debated. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to utilize a synthetic femur model to determine 1) how proximal femur defect size and cortical breach impact femur load to failure (strength) and stiffness, and 2) and how the utilization of an IMN, in a prophylactic fashion, subsequently alters the overall strength and stiffness of the proximal femur.

Methods: A total of 21 synthetic femur models were divided into four groups: 1) intact (no defect), 2) 2 cm defect, 3) 2.5 cm defect, and 4) 4 cm defect. An IMN was inserted in half of the femur specimens that had a defect present. This procedure was performed using standard antegrade technique. Specimens were mechanically tested in offset torsion. Force-displacement curves were utilized to determine each constructs load to failure and overall torsional stiffness. The ultimate load to failure and construct stiffness of the synthetic femurs with defects were compared to the intact synthetic femur, while the femurs with the placement of the IMN were directly compared to the synthetic femurs with matching defect size.

Results: The size of the defect invertedly correlated with the load the failure and overall stiffness. There was no difference in load to failure or overall stiffness when comparing intact models with no defect and the 2 cm defect group (p=0.98, p=0.43). The 2.5 cm, and 4.5 cm defect groups demonstrated significant difference in both load to failure and overall stiffness when compared to intact models with results demonstrating 1313 N (95% CI: 874-1752 N; p<0.001) and 104 N/mm (95% CI: 98-110 N/mm; p=0.03) in the 2.5 cm defect models, and 512 N (95% CI: 390-634 N, p<0.001) and 21 N/mm (95% CI: 9-33 N/mm, p<0.001) in the models with a 4 cm defect. Compared to the groups with defects, the placement an IMN increased overall stiffness in the 2.5 cm defect group (125 N/mm; 95% CI:114-136 N/mm; p=0.003), but not load to failure (p=0.91). In the 4 cm defect group, there was a significant increase in load to failure (1067 N; 95% CI: 835-1300 N; p=0.002) and overall stiffness (57 N/mm; 95% CI:46-69 N/mm; p=0.001).

Conclusion: Prophylactic IMN fixation significantly improved failure load and overall stiffness in the group with the largest cortical defects, but still demonstrated a failure loads less than 50% of the intact model. This investigation suggests that a cortical breach causes a loss of strength that is not completely restored by intramedullary fixation. Level of Evidence: II.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

股骨近端模拟转移性病变稳定后病变大小和负荷与失败的关系。
背景:随着总体癌症生存率的不断提高,骨转移病变的发生率继续增加。伴随骨转移而发生的后续骨骼相关事件可能会使人衰弱。完全性和即将发生的病理性股骨骨折通常需要手术固定。然而,髓内钉结构在提供稳定性方面的有效性仍存在争议。因此,本研究的目的是利用一个合成股骨模型来确定1)股骨近端缺损大小和皮质断裂如何影响股骨负荷到失效(强度)和刚度,以及2)IMN的预防性使用如何随后改变股骨近端整体强度和刚度。方法:21例人造股骨模型分为4组:1)完整(无缺损)、2)2 cm缺损、3)2.5 cm缺损、4)4 cm缺损。在一半存在缺损的股骨标本中植入了IMN。本手术采用标准顺行技术。试件在偏置扭转下进行力学试验。利用力-位移曲线确定每个结构的破坏载荷和整体扭转刚度。将缺损合成股骨的极限破坏载荷和结构刚度与完整合成股骨进行比较,将置入IMN的合成股骨与缺损尺寸匹配的合成股骨进行直接比较。结果:缺陷的大小与载荷、破坏和整体刚度呈负相关。没有缺陷的完整模型与2 cm缺陷组相比,载荷到失效或整体刚度没有差异(p=0.98, p=0.43)。与完整模型相比,2.5 cm和4.5 cm缺陷组在失效载荷和整体刚度方面表现出显著差异,结果显示1313 N (95% CI: 874-1752 N;结论:在皮质缺损最大的组中,预防性IMN固定可显著改善损伤负荷和整体刚度,但仍显示损伤负荷小于完整模型的50%。这项研究表明,皮质断裂导致力量丧失,并不能通过髓内固定完全恢复。证据水平:II。
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
The Iowa orthopaedic journal
The Iowa orthopaedic journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: Any original article relevant to orthopaedic surgery, orthopaedic science or the teaching of either will be considered for publication in The Iowa Orthopaedic Journal. Articles will be enthusiastically received from alumni, visitors to the department, members of the Iowa Orthopaedic Society, residents, and friends of The University of Iowa Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation. The journal is published every June.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信