Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Orthopaedics 7/2021

17.04.2021 | Original Paper

Comparison of different fixation techniques for periprosthetic fractures: a biomechanical study of a new implant

verfasst von: Mehmet Nuri Konya, Ugur Yuzuguldu, Recep Altin, Ugur Fidan

Erschienen in: International Orthopaedics | Ausgabe 7/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

The ideal treatment method for periprosthetic fractures is controversial due to the risks of current methods. Single-cortex screw fixation in prosthesis may lead to implant failure. Therefore, we aimed to develop an implant that lowers the risk for complications. For this study, we designed and tested two new implant models. The first model was a plate with a combination of U nails and cerclage holes. The second model was a U nail plate with a screw, which combines a plate screw with U nail (staples). Our study aimed to compare the stability of two newly designed implants with classical treatment modalities. We used 27 (in 3 groups) artificial bone models and 9 different test models.

Methods

The ISO 7206-4:2010 (E) standards were used for 27 bones in nine groups tested under laboratory conditions. In our study, we examined nine different groups. In group 1, hip the prosthesis was extracted, and a revision femoral stem was embedded. In group 2, periprosthetic fractures were repaired with a plate and cable. In group 3, periprosthetic fractures were repaired with a plate and stapler. In group 4, periprosthetic fractures were repaired with a plate and stapler cable. In group 5, periprosthetic fractures were repaired with a plate stapler and screw. Groups 6 and 7 were the control groups. Group 6 was the only artificial bone group, and group 7 was the prosthesis embedded bone group. Group 8 was periprosthetic fractures treated with unicortical screw fixation with cerclage, and group 9 was periprosthetic fractures treated with unicortical screw fixation. Axial loading was applied to the bones. The yield strength of the system was determined by loading the synthetic bone models with a constant compression speed of 5 mm/min through the centre of motion using the Geratech SH 2000 testing system. During the tests, load and displacement values were recorded, and the stiffness of the models was calculated based on those values.

Results

According to our results, the greatest durability was found in the revision hip prosthesis group (1511 N), and the weakest performance was found in the plate with the stapler implant group (163N). When comparing the data of groups according to compression, significant differences were found in group 2 with groups 1, 4, 5, and 7; group 3 with group 1; group 8 with groups 1 and 5; and group 9 with 1, 5, 7, and according to breakage, significant differences were found in group2 with groups 1, 3, 5, and 7; group 3 with group 1; group 8 with groups 1 and 5; and group 9 with groups 1, 5, and 7 (p<0.001).

Discussion

The revision hip prosthesis treatment for periprosthetic fractures showed the best performance, followed by the plate with stapler screw. In older patients, U nail-augmented implants may be a good alternative for periprosthetic fractures. Unicortical screw and cerclage wire combination fixation results were unsatisfactory results in this study.

Conclusion

This is an experimental study, so further studies, especially patient-specific studies, should be made to expand the findings of this study.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Mäkelä KT, Matilainen M, Pulkkinen P, Fenstad AM, Havelin LI, Engesaeter L, Furnes O, Overgaard S, Pedersen AB, Kärrholm J, Malchau H, Garellick G, Ranstam J, Eskelinen A (2014) Countrywise results of total hip replacement. An analysis of 438,733 hips based on the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database. Acta orthopaedica 85(2):107–116. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2014.893498 Mäkelä KT, Matilainen M, Pulkkinen P, Fenstad AM, Havelin LI, Engesaeter L, Furnes O, Overgaard S, Pedersen AB, Kärrholm J, Malchau H, Garellick G, Ranstam J, Eskelinen A (2014) Countrywise results of total hip replacement. An analysis of 438,733 hips based on the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database. Acta orthopaedica 85(2):107–116. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3109/​17453674.​2014.​893498
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Duncan CP, Masri BA (1995) Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect 44:293–304PubMed Duncan CP, Masri BA (1995) Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect 44:293–304PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Schmidt AH (2018) Problems in plating periprosthetic femur fractures. Injury 49:S49–S50CrossRef Schmidt AH (2018) Problems in plating periprosthetic femur fractures. Injury 49:S49–S50CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Yang PJ, Zhang YF, Ge MZ, Cai TD, Tao JC, Yang HP (1987) Internal fixation with Ni-Ti shape memory alloy compressive staples in orthopedic surgery. A review of 51 cases. Chin Med J 100:712–714PubMed Yang PJ, Zhang YF, Ge MZ, Cai TD, Tao JC, Yang HP (1987) Internal fixation with Ni-Ti shape memory alloy compressive staples in orthopedic surgery. A review of 51 cases. Chin Med J 100:712–714PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of different fixation techniques for periprosthetic fractures: a biomechanical study of a new implant
verfasst von
Mehmet Nuri Konya
Ugur Yuzuguldu
Recep Altin
Ugur Fidan
Publikationsdatum
17.04.2021
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
International Orthopaedics / Ausgabe 7/2021
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-021-05028-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2021

International Orthopaedics 7/2021 Zur Ausgabe

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.