Comparison of three fixation techniques for arcuate fractures.
Adult
Aged
Biomechanical Phenomena
/ physiology
Bone Screws
/ adverse effects
Cadaver
Female
Fibula
/ injuries
Fracture Fixation, Internal
/ methods
Fractures, Avulsion
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Knee Injuries
/ surgery
Knee Joint
/ surgery
Male
Middle Aged
Radiography
/ methods
Suture Anchors
/ adverse effects
Suture Techniques
/ trends
Arcuate fracture
Fibular avulsion fracture
Posterolateral corner
Journal
Injury
ISSN: 1879-0267
Titre abrégé: Injury
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0226040
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
19
04
2019
revised:
17
09
2019
accepted:
30
09
2019
pubmed:
5
11
2019
medline:
2
12
2020
entrez:
5
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Proximal fibula avulsion fractures, or "arcuate fractures", are an often discussed but poorly defined injury pattern which represent a destabilizing injury to the posterolateral corner of the knee. Historical and recent literature discussing reconstruction and repair techniques exist, but there has been little biomechanical evaluation of repair techniques. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the strength of three type of fixation techniques for arcuate fractures: bone tunnels, a screw and washer, and a novel suture anchor technique. A laboratory model of the arcuate fracture pattern was developed. This was used to create an arcuate fracture in 24 cadaveric specimens. Knees were randomized into fixation with either suture tunnel (ST), screw and washer (SW), or suture anchor (SA) repair. A previously published model for inducing varus stress was applied and a MTS testing system was used to assess fixation ultimate and yield strength. Fibular fracture occurred during the fixation of one specimen from the ST group and one from the SA group. Analysis of the remaining 22 specimens revealed a mean ultimate strength of 2422.48 N for the ST group, 2271.78 for SW, and 3041.66 for SA (p = 0.390). Yield strengths were 2065.28 for ST, 1882.43 for SW, and 2871.92 for SA (p = 0.224). Analyses of stiffness and total energy applied were not statistically different (p = 0.111 and 0.601, respectively). Biomechanical analysis of three types of arcuate fragment fixation revealed robust fixation among all methods, supporting surgeon preference for fixation. Fixation may depend on the size of bony fragment and whether or not the injury is a bony or soft tissue injury.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31679831
pii: S0020-1383(19)30564-9
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.09.038
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
478-482Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest To the best of our knowledge, no conflict of interest, financial or other exists, related to this work