Comparison of a 2.7-mm and 3.5-mm locking compression plate for ulnar fractures: a biomechanical evaluation.

Jenna M Wahbeh, Benjamin V Kelley, Cyrus Shokoohi, Sang-Hyun Park, Sai K Devana, Edward Ebramzadeh, Sophia N Sangiorio, Devon M Jeffcoat
{"title":"Comparison of a 2.7-mm and 3.5-mm locking compression plate for ulnar fractures: a biomechanical evaluation.","authors":"Jenna M Wahbeh,&nbsp;Benjamin V Kelley,&nbsp;Cyrus Shokoohi,&nbsp;Sang-Hyun Park,&nbsp;Sai K Devana,&nbsp;Edward Ebramzadeh,&nbsp;Sophia N Sangiorio,&nbsp;Devon M Jeffcoat","doi":"10.1097/OI9.0000000000000278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Implant prominence after ulnar fracture fixation may be mitigated by the use of lower profile plates. The biomechanical strength and stability of 2.7-mm and 3.5-mm locking compression plates for fixation were compared.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two fracture conditions, transverse (N = 10) and oblique (N = 10), were evaluated in an in vitro study. Half of the specimens for each condition were fixed with 2.7-mm plates and the other half with 3.5-mm plates, all fixed with conventional dynamic compression mechanisms. Specimens were loaded under ±2 Nm of cyclic axial torsion, then under 10 Nm of cyclic cantilever bending, and bending to failure. Interfragmentary motion and strain were analyzed to determine construct stability as a function of fracture pattern and plate size.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interfragmentary motion was significantly larger in all constructs fixed with 2.7-mm plates, compared with 3.5-mm plates (<i>P</i> < 0.01). The 2.7-mm constructs with transverse fractures had the greatest motion, ranging between 5° and 10° under axial rotation and 5.0-6.0 mm under bending. Motions were the lowest for 3.5-mm constructs with oblique fractures, ranging between 3.2 and 4.2 mm under bending and 2°-3.5° for axial rotation. For oblique fractures, the bending moment at ultimate failure was 31.4 ± 3.6 Nm for the 2.7-mm constructs and 10.0 ± 1.9 Nm for 3.5-mm constructs (<i>P</i> < 0.01). Similarly, for transverse fractures, the bending moment was 17.9 ± 4.0 Nm for the 2.7-mm constructs and 9.7 ± 1.3 Nm for the 3.5-mm constructs (<i>P</i> < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although 3.5-mm plates were more effective at reducing fracture motion, they were consistently associated with refracture at the distal-most screw hole under load to failure. By contrast, 2.7-mm plates plastically deformed despite excessive loads, potentially avoiding a subsequent fracture.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level V.</p>","PeriodicalId":74381,"journal":{"name":"OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma","volume":"6 3","pages":"e278"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/65/9c/oi9-6-e278.PMC10368380.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000278","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

Objectives: Implant prominence after ulnar fracture fixation may be mitigated by the use of lower profile plates. The biomechanical strength and stability of 2.7-mm and 3.5-mm locking compression plates for fixation were compared.

Methods: Two fracture conditions, transverse (N = 10) and oblique (N = 10), were evaluated in an in vitro study. Half of the specimens for each condition were fixed with 2.7-mm plates and the other half with 3.5-mm plates, all fixed with conventional dynamic compression mechanisms. Specimens were loaded under ±2 Nm of cyclic axial torsion, then under 10 Nm of cyclic cantilever bending, and bending to failure. Interfragmentary motion and strain were analyzed to determine construct stability as a function of fracture pattern and plate size.

Results: Interfragmentary motion was significantly larger in all constructs fixed with 2.7-mm plates, compared with 3.5-mm plates (P < 0.01). The 2.7-mm constructs with transverse fractures had the greatest motion, ranging between 5° and 10° under axial rotation and 5.0-6.0 mm under bending. Motions were the lowest for 3.5-mm constructs with oblique fractures, ranging between 3.2 and 4.2 mm under bending and 2°-3.5° for axial rotation. For oblique fractures, the bending moment at ultimate failure was 31.4 ± 3.6 Nm for the 2.7-mm constructs and 10.0 ± 1.9 Nm for 3.5-mm constructs (P < 0.01). Similarly, for transverse fractures, the bending moment was 17.9 ± 4.0 Nm for the 2.7-mm constructs and 9.7 ± 1.3 Nm for the 3.5-mm constructs (P < 0.01).

Conclusions: Although 3.5-mm plates were more effective at reducing fracture motion, they were consistently associated with refracture at the distal-most screw hole under load to failure. By contrast, 2.7-mm plates plastically deformed despite excessive loads, potentially avoiding a subsequent fracture.

Level of evidence: Level V.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

2.7 mm和3.5 mm锁定加压钢板治疗尺骨骨折的比较:生物力学评价
目的:尺骨骨折固定后种植体突出可以通过使用低侧钢板来缓解。比较2.7 mm和3.5 mm锁定加压钢板的生物力学强度和稳定性。方法:在体外研究中评估两种骨折情况,横向骨折(N = 10)和斜向骨折(N = 10)。每种情况下,一半的试件用2.7 mm板固定,另一半用3.5 mm板固定,均采用常规的动态压缩机构固定。试件在±2 Nm的轴向循环扭转下加载,然后在10 Nm的循环悬臂弯曲下加载,弯曲至破坏。分析了断裂块间运动和应变,以确定结构稳定性作为断裂模式和板块尺寸的函数。结果:与3.5 mm钢板相比,2.7 mm钢板固定的假体碎片间运动明显增加(P < 0.01)。具有横向骨折的2.7 mm假体运动最大,轴向旋转时为5°- 10°,弯曲时为5.0-6.0 mm。对于3.5 mm的斜向骨折,关节活动最小,弯曲时为3.2 - 4.2 mm,轴向旋转时为2°-3.5°。对于斜向骨折,2.7 mm支架的最终破坏弯矩为31.4±3.6 Nm, 3.5 mm支架的最终破坏弯矩为10.0±1.9 Nm (P < 0.01)。对于横向骨折,2.7 mm组的弯矩为17.9±4.0 Nm, 3.5 mm组的弯矩为9.7±1.3 Nm (P < 0.01)。结论:尽管3.5 mm钢板在减少骨折活动方面更有效,但在载荷失效的情况下,它始终与最远端螺钉孔的再骨折有关。相比之下,2.7 mm钢板即使承受过大载荷也会发生塑性变形,从而可能避免随后的骨折。证据等级:V级。
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
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
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