内踝骨折单、双扭张力带、松质螺钉和单螺钉张力带模型的生物力学比较。

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Gurdal Nusran, Onur Yılmaz, İbrahim Mutlu, Tolgahan Kuru, H Yener Erken
{"title":"内踝骨折单、双扭张力带、松质螺钉和单螺钉张力带模型的生物力学比较。","authors":"Gurdal Nusran, Onur Yılmaz, İbrahim Mutlu, Tolgahan Kuru, H Yener Erken","doi":"10.7547/22-172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Models using a double-twist tension band, two partially threaded cancellous screws, a single-twist tension band, and a single-screw tension band were biomechanically compared for fixation of medial malleolus fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All 72 composite cortical tibial bones used in the study were osteotomy suitable for medial malleolus fracture. They were divided into four groups: double-twist tension band (group 1), two partially threaded cancellous screws (group 2), single-twist tension band (group 3), and single-screw tension band (group 4), with 18 composite tibial bones in each group. Bones in each group were divided into three subgroups and subjected to biomechanical tests by applying force as tension, transverse, and axial loading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the tension and transverse loading tests, the highest mean stiffness was in groups 1 and 4. Group 4 had statistically significantly higher stiffness values than groups 2 and 3. All of the other groups had statistically significantly higher stiffness values than group 2. A statistically significant difference was found comparing group 4 (with the highest value in the axial loading test) with the other groups. No significant difference was found between groups 1 and 3 in any of the biomechanical tests.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Tension band method did not make a difference biomechanically when applied as a double or single twist. Single-screw tension band was found to be the most stable fixation method in tension, transverse, and axial loading tests. We think that the single-screw tension band method is a stable and suitable fixation method and should find more place in current surgical practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":17241,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biomechanical Comparison of Single- and Double-Twist Tension Band, Cancellous Screw, and Single-Screw Tension Band Models in Medial Malleolus Fractures.\",\"authors\":\"Gurdal Nusran, Onur Yılmaz, İbrahim Mutlu, Tolgahan Kuru, H Yener Erken\",\"doi\":\"10.7547/22-172\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Models using a double-twist tension band, two partially threaded cancellous screws, a single-twist tension band, and a single-screw tension band were biomechanically compared for fixation of medial malleolus fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All 72 composite cortical tibial bones used in the study were osteotomy suitable for medial malleolus fracture. They were divided into four groups: double-twist tension band (group 1), two partially threaded cancellous screws (group 2), single-twist tension band (group 3), and single-screw tension band (group 4), with 18 composite tibial bones in each group. Bones in each group were divided into three subgroups and subjected to biomechanical tests by applying force as tension, transverse, and axial loading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the tension and transverse loading tests, the highest mean stiffness was in groups 1 and 4. Group 4 had statistically significantly higher stiffness values than groups 2 and 3. All of the other groups had statistically significantly higher stiffness values than group 2. A statistically significant difference was found comparing group 4 (with the highest value in the axial loading test) with the other groups. No significant difference was found between groups 1 and 3 in any of the biomechanical tests.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Tension band method did not make a difference biomechanically when applied as a double or single twist. Single-screw tension band was found to be the most stable fixation method in tension, transverse, and axial loading tests. We think that the single-screw tension band method is a stable and suitable fixation method and should find more place in current surgical practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association\",\"volume\":\"115 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7547/22-172\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7547/22-172","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对使用双捻张力带、两枚部分螺纹松质螺钉、单捻张力带和单螺钉张力带固定内踝骨折的模型进行生物力学比较。方法:72块胫骨皮质复合骨均采用适合内踝骨折的截骨方法。分为双扭张力带组(1组)、两枚半螺纹松质螺钉组(2组)、单扭张力带组(3组)、单螺钉张力带组(4组)4组,每组18块复合胫骨。每组骨分为三个亚组,通过施加拉力、横向和轴向载荷进行生物力学测试。结果:在拉伸和横向加载试验中,1组和4组的平均刚度最高。4组的刚度值明显高于2、3组。其他各组的刚度值均显著高于第2组。第4组(轴向载荷试验值最高)与其他组比较,差异有统计学意义。在任何生物力学测试中,1组和3组之间没有发现显著差异。结论:张力带法在双捻或单捻时对生物力学没有影响。在拉力、横向和轴向载荷试验中发现单螺钉张力带是最稳定的固定方法。我们认为单螺钉张力带法是一种稳定、合适的固定方法,在目前的外科实践中应得到更多的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Biomechanical Comparison of Single- and Double-Twist Tension Band, Cancellous Screw, and Single-Screw Tension Band Models in Medial Malleolus Fractures.

Background: Models using a double-twist tension band, two partially threaded cancellous screws, a single-twist tension band, and a single-screw tension band were biomechanically compared for fixation of medial malleolus fractures.

Methods: All 72 composite cortical tibial bones used in the study were osteotomy suitable for medial malleolus fracture. They were divided into four groups: double-twist tension band (group 1), two partially threaded cancellous screws (group 2), single-twist tension band (group 3), and single-screw tension band (group 4), with 18 composite tibial bones in each group. Bones in each group were divided into three subgroups and subjected to biomechanical tests by applying force as tension, transverse, and axial loading.

Results: In the tension and transverse loading tests, the highest mean stiffness was in groups 1 and 4. Group 4 had statistically significantly higher stiffness values than groups 2 and 3. All of the other groups had statistically significantly higher stiffness values than group 2. A statistically significant difference was found comparing group 4 (with the highest value in the axial loading test) with the other groups. No significant difference was found between groups 1 and 3 in any of the biomechanical tests.

Conclusions: Tension band method did not make a difference biomechanically when applied as a double or single twist. Single-screw tension band was found to be the most stable fixation method in tension, transverse, and axial loading tests. We think that the single-screw tension band method is a stable and suitable fixation method and should find more place in current surgical practices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, the official journal of the Association, is the oldest and most frequently cited peer-reviewed journal in the profession of foot and ankle medicine. Founded in 1907 and appearing 6 times per year, it publishes research studies, case reports, literature reviews, special communications, clinical correspondence, letters to the editor, book reviews, and various other types of submissions. The Journal is included in major indexing and abstracting services for biomedical literature.
×
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