A biomechanical assessment of fixation methods for a coronoid prosthesis
Abstract Background The coronoid process is an integral component for maintaining elbow joint stability. When fixation of a fracture is not possible, prosthetic replacement may be a feasible solution for restoring stability. The purpose of this in-vitro biomechanical study was to compare fixation me...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical biomechanics (Bristol) 2016-02, Vol.32, p.14-19 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 19 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 14 |
container_title | Clinical biomechanics (Bristol) |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Gray, Alia B Alolabi, Bashar Deluce, Simon Ferreira, Louis M Athwal, George S King, Graham J.W Johnson, James A |
description | Abstract Background The coronoid process is an integral component for maintaining elbow joint stability. When fixation of a fracture is not possible, prosthetic replacement may be a feasible solution for restoring stability. The purpose of this in-vitro biomechanical study was to compare fixation methods for a coronoid implant. Methods A coronoid prosthesis was subjected to distally-directed tip loading after implantation using four fixation methods: press-fit, anterior-to-posterior screws, posterior-to-anterior screws, and cement. Testing was performed on seven fresh-frozen ulnae in a repeated-measures model. Rounds of cyclic loading were applied at 1 Hz, for 100 cycles, increased in 50 N increments up to a maximum of 400 N. Micro-motion of the implant was quantified using an optical-tracking system. Outcome variables included total displacement, distal translation, gapping, anterior translation and axial stem rotation. Findings Cement fixation reduced implant micro-motion compared to screw fixation, while the greatest implant micro-motion was observed in press-fit fixation. Comparing screw-fixation techniques, posterior-anterior screws provided superior stability only in distal translation. The implant did not experience displacements exceeding 0.9 mm with screw or cement fixation. Interpretation Cement fixation provides the best initial fixation for a coronoid implant. However, the stability provided by both methods of screw fixation may be sufficient to allow osseous integration to be achieved for long-term fixation. Large displacements were observed using the press-fit fixation technique, suggesting that modifications would need to be developed and tested before this technique could be recommended for clinical application. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.11.017 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1835562469</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0268003315003198</els_id><sourcerecordid>1811898834</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c498t-5a4248ef943eab8596a044cf05abc7315293c54315d347ef6a8244c705b63a323</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkk1v1DAQQC0EotvCX0DhxiXB44_YviBVK0orVeqhcLYcZ6L1ksTFziL67-toF4S40IttyW9mNPOGkPdAG6DQftw3fgxzF-KEftcwCrIBaCioF2QDWpkamIKXZENZq2tKOT8j5znvKaWCSfWanLFWKcmY2ZDry-qUx83Bu7FyOWPOE85LFYdqCL_cEuJcTbjsYp-rIabKVT6mOMfQVw8p5mWHOeQ35NXgxoxvT_cF-Xb1-ev2ur69-3KzvbytvTB6qaUTTGgcjODoOi1N66gQfqDSdV5xkMxwL0V59FwoHFqnWflXVHYtd5zxC_LhmLeU_nHAvNgpZI_j6GaMh2xBcylbJlrzDBRAG625-D-qFC2D5VoV1BxRX3rPCQf7kMLk0qMFalc9dm__0mNXPRbAFj0l9t2pzKGbsP8T-dtHAbZHAMsIfwZMNvuAs8c-JPSL7WN4VplP_2RZyVXvd3zEvI-HNBdHFmxmltr7dU_WNQFZTjCaPwEvK7oi</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1770879387</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A biomechanical assessment of fixation methods for a coronoid prosthesis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Gray, Alia B ; Alolabi, Bashar ; Deluce, Simon ; Ferreira, Louis M ; Athwal, George S ; King, Graham J.W ; Johnson, James A</creator><creatorcontrib>Gray, Alia B ; Alolabi, Bashar ; Deluce, Simon ; Ferreira, Louis M ; Athwal, George S ; King, Graham J.W ; Johnson, James A</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background The coronoid process is an integral component for maintaining elbow joint stability. When fixation of a fracture is not possible, prosthetic replacement may be a feasible solution for restoring stability. The purpose of this in-vitro biomechanical study was to compare fixation methods for a coronoid implant. Methods A coronoid prosthesis was subjected to distally-directed tip loading after implantation using four fixation methods: press-fit, anterior-to-posterior screws, posterior-to-anterior screws, and cement. Testing was performed on seven fresh-frozen ulnae in a repeated-measures model. Rounds of cyclic loading were applied at 1 Hz, for 100 cycles, increased in 50 N increments up to a maximum of 400 N. Micro-motion of the implant was quantified using an optical-tracking system. Outcome variables included total displacement, distal translation, gapping, anterior translation and axial stem rotation. Findings Cement fixation reduced implant micro-motion compared to screw fixation, while the greatest implant micro-motion was observed in press-fit fixation. Comparing screw-fixation techniques, posterior-anterior screws provided superior stability only in distal translation. The implant did not experience displacements exceeding 0.9 mm with screw or cement fixation. Interpretation Cement fixation provides the best initial fixation for a coronoid implant. However, the stability provided by both methods of screw fixation may be sufficient to allow osseous integration to be achieved for long-term fixation. Large displacements were observed using the press-fit fixation technique, suggesting that modifications would need to be developed and tested before this technique could be recommended for clinical application.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0268-0033</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1271</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.11.017</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26775229</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Biomechanics ; Bone Cements ; Bone Screws ; Cements ; Coronoid ; Displacement ; Elbow ; Elbow Joint - surgery ; Elbow Prosthesis ; Female ; Fixation ; Fracture ; Fractures, Bone - surgery ; Humans ; Ligaments, Articular - surgery ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Motion ; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation ; Prosthesis ; Prosthesis Implantation ; Prosthetics ; Screws ; Stability ; Surgical implants ; Ulna - surgery ; Ulna Fractures - surgery</subject><ispartof>Clinical biomechanics (Bristol), 2016-02, Vol.32, p.14-19</ispartof><rights>American Society of Biomechanics</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c498t-5a4248ef943eab8596a044cf05abc7315293c54315d347ef6a8244c705b63a323</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c498t-5a4248ef943eab8596a044cf05abc7315293c54315d347ef6a8244c705b63a323</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.11.017$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26775229$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gray, Alia B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alolabi, Bashar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deluce, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferreira, Louis M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Athwal, George S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>King, Graham J.W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, James A</creatorcontrib><title>A biomechanical assessment of fixation methods for a coronoid prosthesis</title><title>Clinical biomechanics (Bristol)</title><addtitle>Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)</addtitle><description>Abstract Background The coronoid process is an integral component for maintaining elbow joint stability. When fixation of a fracture is not possible, prosthetic replacement may be a feasible solution for restoring stability. The purpose of this in-vitro biomechanical study was to compare fixation methods for a coronoid implant. Methods A coronoid prosthesis was subjected to distally-directed tip loading after implantation using four fixation methods: press-fit, anterior-to-posterior screws, posterior-to-anterior screws, and cement. Testing was performed on seven fresh-frozen ulnae in a repeated-measures model. Rounds of cyclic loading were applied at 1 Hz, for 100 cycles, increased in 50 N increments up to a maximum of 400 N. Micro-motion of the implant was quantified using an optical-tracking system. Outcome variables included total displacement, distal translation, gapping, anterior translation and axial stem rotation. Findings Cement fixation reduced implant micro-motion compared to screw fixation, while the greatest implant micro-motion was observed in press-fit fixation. Comparing screw-fixation techniques, posterior-anterior screws provided superior stability only in distal translation. The implant did not experience displacements exceeding 0.9 mm with screw or cement fixation. Interpretation Cement fixation provides the best initial fixation for a coronoid implant. However, the stability provided by both methods of screw fixation may be sufficient to allow osseous integration to be achieved for long-term fixation. Large displacements were observed using the press-fit fixation technique, suggesting that modifications would need to be developed and tested before this technique could be recommended for clinical application.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Biomechanics</subject><subject>Bone Cements</subject><subject>Bone Screws</subject><subject>Cements</subject><subject>Coronoid</subject><subject>Displacement</subject><subject>Elbow</subject><subject>Elbow Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Elbow Prosthesis</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fixation</subject><subject>Fracture</subject><subject>Fractures, Bone - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Ligaments, Articular - surgery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Motion</subject><subject>Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Prosthesis</subject><subject>Prosthesis Implantation</subject><subject>Prosthetics</subject><subject>Screws</subject><subject>Stability</subject><subject>Surgical implants</subject><subject>Ulna - surgery</subject><subject>Ulna Fractures - surgery</subject><issn>0268-0033</issn><issn>1879-1271</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkk1v1DAQQC0EotvCX0DhxiXB44_YviBVK0orVeqhcLYcZ6L1ksTFziL67-toF4S40IttyW9mNPOGkPdAG6DQftw3fgxzF-KEftcwCrIBaCioF2QDWpkamIKXZENZq2tKOT8j5znvKaWCSfWanLFWKcmY2ZDry-qUx83Bu7FyOWPOE85LFYdqCL_cEuJcTbjsYp-rIabKVT6mOMfQVw8p5mWHOeQ35NXgxoxvT_cF-Xb1-ev2ur69-3KzvbytvTB6qaUTTGgcjODoOi1N66gQfqDSdV5xkMxwL0V59FwoHFqnWflXVHYtd5zxC_LhmLeU_nHAvNgpZI_j6GaMh2xBcylbJlrzDBRAG625-D-qFC2D5VoV1BxRX3rPCQf7kMLk0qMFalc9dm__0mNXPRbAFj0l9t2pzKGbsP8T-dtHAbZHAMsIfwZMNvuAs8c-JPSL7WN4VplP_2RZyVXvd3zEvI-HNBdHFmxmltr7dU_WNQFZTjCaPwEvK7oi</recordid><startdate>20160201</startdate><enddate>20160201</enddate><creator>Gray, Alia B</creator><creator>Alolabi, Bashar</creator><creator>Deluce, Simon</creator><creator>Ferreira, Louis M</creator><creator>Athwal, George S</creator><creator>King, Graham J.W</creator><creator>Johnson, James A</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><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><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160201</creationdate><title>A biomechanical assessment of fixation methods for a coronoid prosthesis</title><author>Gray, Alia B ; Alolabi, Bashar ; Deluce, Simon ; Ferreira, Louis M ; Athwal, George S ; King, Graham J.W ; Johnson, James A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c498t-5a4248ef943eab8596a044cf05abc7315293c54315d347ef6a8244c705b63a323</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Biomechanics</topic><topic>Bone Cements</topic><topic>Bone Screws</topic><topic>Cements</topic><topic>Coronoid</topic><topic>Displacement</topic><topic>Elbow</topic><topic>Elbow Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Elbow Prosthesis</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fixation</topic><topic>Fracture</topic><topic>Fractures, Bone - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Ligaments, Articular - surgery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Motion</topic><topic>Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Prosthesis</topic><topic>Prosthesis Implantation</topic><topic>Prosthetics</topic><topic>Screws</topic><topic>Stability</topic><topic>Surgical implants</topic><topic>Ulna - surgery</topic><topic>Ulna Fractures - surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gray, Alia B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alolabi, Bashar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deluce, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferreira, Louis M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Athwal, George S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>King, Graham J.W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, James A</creatorcontrib><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><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><jtitle>Clinical biomechanics (Bristol)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gray, Alia B</au><au>Alolabi, Bashar</au><au>Deluce, Simon</au><au>Ferreira, Louis M</au><au>Athwal, George S</au><au>King, Graham J.W</au><au>Johnson, James A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A biomechanical assessment of fixation methods for a coronoid prosthesis</atitle><jtitle>Clinical biomechanics (Bristol)</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)</addtitle><date>2016-02-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>32</volume><spage>14</spage><epage>19</epage><pages>14-19</pages><issn>0268-0033</issn><eissn>1879-1271</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background The coronoid process is an integral component for maintaining elbow joint stability. When fixation of a fracture is not possible, prosthetic replacement may be a feasible solution for restoring stability. The purpose of this in-vitro biomechanical study was to compare fixation methods for a coronoid implant. Methods A coronoid prosthesis was subjected to distally-directed tip loading after implantation using four fixation methods: press-fit, anterior-to-posterior screws, posterior-to-anterior screws, and cement. Testing was performed on seven fresh-frozen ulnae in a repeated-measures model. Rounds of cyclic loading were applied at 1 Hz, for 100 cycles, increased in 50 N increments up to a maximum of 400 N. Micro-motion of the implant was quantified using an optical-tracking system. Outcome variables included total displacement, distal translation, gapping, anterior translation and axial stem rotation. Findings Cement fixation reduced implant micro-motion compared to screw fixation, while the greatest implant micro-motion was observed in press-fit fixation. Comparing screw-fixation techniques, posterior-anterior screws provided superior stability only in distal translation. The implant did not experience displacements exceeding 0.9 mm with screw or cement fixation. Interpretation Cement fixation provides the best initial fixation for a coronoid implant. However, the stability provided by both methods of screw fixation may be sufficient to allow osseous integration to be achieved for long-term fixation. Large displacements were observed using the press-fit fixation technique, suggesting that modifications would need to be developed and tested before this technique could be recommended for clinical application.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>26775229</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.11.017</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0268-0033 |
ispartof | Clinical biomechanics (Bristol), 2016-02, Vol.32, p.14-19 |
issn | 0268-0033 1879-1271 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1835562469 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Biomechanical Phenomena Biomechanics Bone Cements Bone Screws Cements Coronoid Displacement Elbow Elbow Joint - surgery Elbow Prosthesis Female Fixation Fracture Fractures, Bone - surgery Humans Ligaments, Articular - surgery Male Middle Aged Motion Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Prosthesis Prosthesis Implantation Prosthetics Screws Stability Surgical implants Ulna - surgery Ulna Fractures - surgery |
title | A biomechanical assessment of fixation methods for a coronoid prosthesis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T08%3A03%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20biomechanical%20assessment%20of%20fixation%20methods%20for%20a%20coronoid%20prosthesis&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20biomechanics%20(Bristol)&rft.au=Gray,%20Alia%20B&rft.date=2016-02-01&rft.volume=32&rft.spage=14&rft.epage=19&rft.pages=14-19&rft.issn=0268-0033&rft.eissn=1879-1271&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.11.017&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1811898834%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1770879387&rft_id=info:pmid/26775229&rft_els_id=S0268003315003198&rfr_iscdi=true |