Journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2014
Distal Ulna Fractures: A Biomechanical Comparison of Locking Versus Nonlocking Plating Constructs.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Collins Melissa, Hart Adam, Hines Jerod, Steffen Thomas, Harvey Edward J, Martineau Paul A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the biomechanical properties of plating options for distal ulna fractures.
METHODS: Fourth-generation ulna artificial bones were osteotomized and fixed with 4 different constructs: 2 locking compression plates (a straight 2.7-mm plate and a 2.4-mm T-plate) with both nonlocking and locking screws. The artificial bones underwent nondestructive tests to determine construct stiffness in flexion/extension and lateral bending. The final testing consisted of cyclical loading in axial torsion until implant failure.
RESULTS: The straight plate fixation construct was significantly stiffer than the T-plate construct for both flexion/extension bending (P < 0.001) and radial/ulnar bending (P < 0.05). Nonlocking screws provided significantly stiffer fixation in flexion bending than locking screws (P < 0.05); however, no difference was found in extension bending. Conversely, locking screws were significantly stiffer in radial/ulnar bending than the nonlocking screws (P < 0.05). Failure under torsional cyclical loading was significantly different among constructs. The straight plate with nonlocking construct withstood the most half-cycles. The mechanisms of failure were unique to each type of fixation.
CONCLUSIONS: These results do not show any clear biomechanical advantage of locked plating for fractures of the distal ulna. The increased stiffness associated with locked plating likely contributes to earlier and more pronounced failure mechanisms under repetitive axial torsion.
METHODS: Fourth-generation ulna artificial bones were osteotomized and fixed with 4 different constructs: 2 locking compression plates (a straight 2.7-mm plate and a 2.4-mm T-plate) with both nonlocking and locking screws. The artificial bones underwent nondestructive tests to determine construct stiffness in flexion/extension and lateral bending. The final testing consisted of cyclical loading in axial torsion until implant failure.
RESULTS: The straight plate fixation construct was significantly stiffer than the T-plate construct for both flexion/extension bending (P < 0.001) and radial/ulnar bending (P < 0.05). Nonlocking screws provided significantly stiffer fixation in flexion bending than locking screws (P < 0.05); however, no difference was found in extension bending. Conversely, locking screws were significantly stiffer in radial/ulnar bending than the nonlocking screws (P < 0.05). Failure under torsional cyclical loading was significantly different among constructs. The straight plate with nonlocking construct withstood the most half-cycles. The mechanisms of failure were unique to each type of fixation.
CONCLUSIONS: These results do not show any clear biomechanical advantage of locked plating for fractures of the distal ulna. The increased stiffness associated with locked plating likely contributes to earlier and more pronounced failure mechanisms under repetitive axial torsion.