External fixators for pelvic fractures: Comparison of the stiffness of current systems
We evaluated the stiffness of external fixation (EF) systems with a reproducible, standardized human pelvic replica of aluminum and perspex in which a type C pelvic ring injury was created. 12 EF systems were analyzed in 2 situations that necessarily occur during a walking cycle. Endpoints were defi...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Acta orthopaedica 2003-04, Vol.74 (2), p.165-171 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 171 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 165 |
| container_title | Acta orthopaedica |
| container_volume | 74 |
| creator | Ponsen, Kees J Hoek van Dijke, Gilbert A Joosse, Pieter Snijders, Chris J |
| description | We evaluated the stiffness of external fixation (EF) systems with a reproducible, standardized human pelvic replica of aluminum and perspex in which a type C pelvic ring injury was created. 12 EF systems were analyzed in 2 situations that necessarily occur during a walking cycle. Endpoints were defined as 15 mm of dislocation or tolerance of the maximum load in each situation. In the no weightbearing situation, all except 2 fixators failed; in the weightbearing situation, all fixators failed. Single bar systems performed better than frame configurations. Stability provided by any external fixator is low, and in the case of a type C pelvic ring injury, it is insufficient for patient mobilization and weightbearing. Single bar systems provide more stability than frames. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1080/00016470310013897 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_infor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_informahealthcare_journals_10_1080_00016470310013897</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>73379996</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-92959f35961afbf24a9be9fc09f90f3231e8098d04de63ba644eca3466e878e83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcFu1DAQhi1ERUvhAbggX-C2dBw7iQ1c0KpApUpcgGs06x1rUznx4nFK9-3JahcqVKmnGY2-fzT-LMQrBe8UWLgAANWYFrSaG21d-0ScqdbUC93Y6um_vjWn4jnzDYC2xsEzcaoqC62u9Jn4eXlXKI8YZejvsKTMMqQstxRvey9DRl-mTPxeLtOwxdxzGmUKsmxIculDGIl5P_BTzjQWyTsuNPALcRIwMr081nPx4_Pl9-XXxfW3L1fLT9cLb3RVFq5ytQu6do3CsAqVQbciFzy44CDMByqy4OwazJoavcLGGPKoTdOQbS1ZfS7eHvZuc_o1EZdu6NlTjDhSmrhrtW6dc80MqgPoc2LOFLpt7gfMu05Bt5fZPZA5Z14fl0-rgdb3iaO9GXhzBJA9xtnW6Hu-54yFuqr33McD14-z3AF_pxzXXcFdTPlvSD92x4f_4hvCWDYeM3U3adp_Hj_yij-TeaHR</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>73379996</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>External fixators for pelvic fractures: Comparison of the stiffness of current systems</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ponsen, Kees J ; Hoek van Dijke, Gilbert A ; Joosse, Pieter ; Snijders, Chris J</creator><creatorcontrib>Ponsen, Kees J ; Hoek van Dijke, Gilbert A ; Joosse, Pieter ; Snijders, Chris J</creatorcontrib><description>We evaluated the stiffness of external fixation (EF) systems with a reproducible, standardized human pelvic replica of aluminum and perspex in which a type C pelvic ring injury was created. 12 EF systems were analyzed in 2 situations that necessarily occur during a walking cycle. Endpoints were defined as 15 mm of dislocation or tolerance of the maximum load in each situation. In the no weightbearing situation, all except 2 fixators failed; in the weightbearing situation, all fixators failed. Single bar systems performed better than frame configurations. Stability provided by any external fixator is low, and in the case of a type C pelvic ring injury, it is insufficient for patient mobilization and weightbearing. Single bar systems provide more stability than frames.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1745-3674</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0001-6470</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1745-3682</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/00016470310013897</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12807323</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AOSAAK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basingstoke: Informa UK Ltd</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Elasticity ; Equipment Design ; External Fixators ; Fractures, Bone - physiopathology ; Fractures, Bone - surgery ; Humans ; In Vitro Techniques ; Medical sciences ; Models, Anatomic ; Pelvic Bones - injuries ; Pelvic Bones - physiopathology ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Technology. Biomaterials. Equipments ; Weight-Bearing</subject><ispartof>Acta orthopaedica, 2003-04, Vol.74 (2), p.165-171</ispartof><rights>2003 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted 2003</rights><rights>2003 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-92959f35961afbf24a9be9fc09f90f3231e8098d04de63ba644eca3466e878e83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-92959f35961afbf24a9be9fc09f90f3231e8098d04de63ba644eca3466e878e83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=14805253$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12807323$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ponsen, Kees J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoek van Dijke, Gilbert A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joosse, Pieter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Snijders, Chris J</creatorcontrib><title>External fixators for pelvic fractures: Comparison of the stiffness of current systems</title><title>Acta orthopaedica</title><addtitle>Acta Orthop Scand</addtitle><description>We evaluated the stiffness of external fixation (EF) systems with a reproducible, standardized human pelvic replica of aluminum and perspex in which a type C pelvic ring injury was created. 12 EF systems were analyzed in 2 situations that necessarily occur during a walking cycle. Endpoints were defined as 15 mm of dislocation or tolerance of the maximum load in each situation. In the no weightbearing situation, all except 2 fixators failed; in the weightbearing situation, all fixators failed. Single bar systems performed better than frame configurations. Stability provided by any external fixator is low, and in the case of a type C pelvic ring injury, it is insufficient for patient mobilization and weightbearing. Single bar systems provide more stability than frames.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Elasticity</subject><subject>Equipment Design</subject><subject>External Fixators</subject><subject>Fractures, Bone - physiopathology</subject><subject>Fractures, Bone - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>In Vitro Techniques</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Models, Anatomic</subject><subject>Pelvic Bones - injuries</subject><subject>Pelvic Bones - physiopathology</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Technology. Biomaterials. Equipments</subject><subject>Weight-Bearing</subject><issn>1745-3674</issn><issn>0001-6470</issn><issn>1745-3682</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kcFu1DAQhi1ERUvhAbggX-C2dBw7iQ1c0KpApUpcgGs06x1rUznx4nFK9-3JahcqVKmnGY2-fzT-LMQrBe8UWLgAANWYFrSaG21d-0ScqdbUC93Y6um_vjWn4jnzDYC2xsEzcaoqC62u9Jn4eXlXKI8YZejvsKTMMqQstxRvey9DRl-mTPxeLtOwxdxzGmUKsmxIculDGIl5P_BTzjQWyTsuNPALcRIwMr081nPx4_Pl9-XXxfW3L1fLT9cLb3RVFq5ytQu6do3CsAqVQbciFzy44CDMByqy4OwazJoavcLGGPKoTdOQbS1ZfS7eHvZuc_o1EZdu6NlTjDhSmrhrtW6dc80MqgPoc2LOFLpt7gfMu05Bt5fZPZA5Z14fl0-rgdb3iaO9GXhzBJA9xtnW6Hu-54yFuqr33McD14-z3AF_pxzXXcFdTPlvSD92x4f_4hvCWDYeM3U3adp_Hj_yij-TeaHR</recordid><startdate>20030401</startdate><enddate>20030401</enddate><creator>Ponsen, Kees J</creator><creator>Hoek van Dijke, Gilbert A</creator><creator>Joosse, Pieter</creator><creator>Snijders, Chris J</creator><general>Informa UK Ltd</general><general>Taylor & Francis</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030401</creationdate><title>External fixators for pelvic fractures: Comparison of the stiffness of current systems</title><author>Ponsen, Kees J ; Hoek van Dijke, Gilbert A ; Joosse, Pieter ; Snijders, Chris J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-92959f35961afbf24a9be9fc09f90f3231e8098d04de63ba644eca3466e878e83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Elasticity</topic><topic>Equipment Design</topic><topic>External Fixators</topic><topic>Fractures, Bone - physiopathology</topic><topic>Fractures, Bone - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>In Vitro Techniques</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Models, Anatomic</topic><topic>Pelvic Bones - injuries</topic><topic>Pelvic Bones - physiopathology</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Technology. Biomaterials. Equipments</topic><topic>Weight-Bearing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ponsen, Kees J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoek van Dijke, Gilbert A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joosse, Pieter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Snijders, Chris J</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta orthopaedica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ponsen, Kees J</au><au>Hoek van Dijke, Gilbert A</au><au>Joosse, Pieter</au><au>Snijders, Chris J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>External fixators for pelvic fractures: Comparison of the stiffness of current systems</atitle><jtitle>Acta orthopaedica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Orthop Scand</addtitle><date>2003-04-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>74</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>165</spage><epage>171</epage><pages>165-171</pages><issn>1745-3674</issn><issn>0001-6470</issn><eissn>1745-3682</eissn><coden>AOSAAK</coden><abstract>We evaluated the stiffness of external fixation (EF) systems with a reproducible, standardized human pelvic replica of aluminum and perspex in which a type C pelvic ring injury was created. 12 EF systems were analyzed in 2 situations that necessarily occur during a walking cycle. Endpoints were defined as 15 mm of dislocation or tolerance of the maximum load in each situation. In the no weightbearing situation, all except 2 fixators failed; in the weightbearing situation, all fixators failed. Single bar systems performed better than frame configurations. Stability provided by any external fixator is low, and in the case of a type C pelvic ring injury, it is insufficient for patient mobilization and weightbearing. Single bar systems provide more stability than frames.</abstract><cop>Basingstoke</cop><pub>Informa UK Ltd</pub><pmid>12807323</pmid><doi>10.1080/00016470310013897</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1745-3674 |
| ispartof | Acta orthopaedica, 2003-04, Vol.74 (2), p.165-171 |
| issn | 1745-3674 0001-6470 1745-3682 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_informahealthcare_journals_10_1080_00016470310013897 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Biological and medical sciences Biomechanical Phenomena Elasticity Equipment Design External Fixators Fractures, Bone - physiopathology Fractures, Bone - surgery Humans In Vitro Techniques Medical sciences Models, Anatomic Pelvic Bones - injuries Pelvic Bones - physiopathology Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Technology. Biomaterials. Equipments Weight-Bearing |
| title | External fixators for pelvic fractures: Comparison of the stiffness of current systems |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T09%3A03%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_infor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=External%20fixators%20for%20pelvic%20fractures:%20Comparison%20of%20the%20stiffness%20of%20current%20systems&rft.jtitle=Acta%20orthopaedica&rft.au=Ponsen,%20Kees%20J&rft.date=2003-04-01&rft.volume=74&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=165&rft.epage=171&rft.pages=165-171&rft.issn=1745-3674&rft.eissn=1745-3682&rft.coden=AOSAAK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/00016470310013897&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_infor%3E73379996%3C/proquest_infor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=73379996&rft_id=info:pmid/12807323&rfr_iscdi=true |