Low-profile dual mini-fragment plating of diaphyseal clavicle fractures. A biomechanical comparative testing

Implant removal rates after clavicle plating are high. Recently, low-profile dual mini-fragment plate constructs have revealed lower implant removal rates following fixation of diaphyseal clavicle fractures. However, they have not been subject to a biomechanical investigation. To: (1) investigate th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical biomechanics (Bristol) 2022-04, Vol.94, p.105634-105634, Article 105634
Hauptverfasser: Pastor, Torsten, Knobe, Matthias, van de Wall, Bryan J.M., Rompen, Ingmar F., Zderic, Ivan, Visscher, Luke, Link, Björn-Christian, Babst, Reto, Gueorguiev, Boyko, Beeres, Frank J.P.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Implant removal rates after clavicle plating are high. Recently, low-profile dual mini-fragment plate constructs have revealed lower implant removal rates following fixation of diaphyseal clavicle fractures. However, they have not been subject to a biomechanical investigation. To: (1) investigate thebiomechanical competence of different dual plate designs and (2) compare them against single superoanterior plating. Twelve artificial clavicles with a simulated AO/OTA 15.2C unstable diaphyseal clavicle fracture were assigned to 2 groups and instrumented with dual titanium mandible plates as follows: Group 1 – 2.5 mm anterior plus 2.0 mm superior (2.5/2.0); Group 2 – 2.0 mm anterior plus 2.0 mm superior (2.0/2.0). Specimens were cyclically tested to failure under craniocaudal cantilever bending superimposed with torsion around the shaft axis and compared to previous published data acquired using 6 locking superoanterior plates tested under the same conditions (Group 3). Initial stiffness was highest in Group 1 followed by Group 2 and Group 3, being significantly different between Group 1 and Group 3 (p = 0.020). Displacement after 5000 cycles was biggest in Group 3, followed by Group 2 and Group 1, with significant differences between Group 3 and both Group 1 and Group 2 (p ≤ 0.027). Cycles to failure were highest in Group 3 followed by Group 1 and Group 2, being significantly different between Group 2 and Group 3 (p = 0.004). Low-profile 2.0/2.0 dual plates demonstrated similar initial stiffness compared with single 3.5 mm locking plates, however, they revealed significantly lower resistance to failure. Moreover, low-profile 2.5/2.0 dual plates demonstrated significantly higher initial stiffness and similar resistance to failure compared with single 3.5 mm locking plates and can therefore be considered as their useful alternative for diaphyseal clavicle fracture fixation. •2.0/2.0 dual plates revealed lower failure resistance compared to 3.5 single plates.•2.5/2.0 dual plates revealed similar failure resistance compared to 3.5 single plates.•2.5/2.0 dual plates may be a useful alternative for diaphyseal clavicle fractures.
ISSN:0268-0033
1879-1271
DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2022.105634