Locking the Taylor Spatial Frame - The effect of three additional longitudinal rods on osteotomy site movements.
Biomechanics
Interfragmentary movement
Load measurements
Stiffness
TSF
Taylor Spatial Frame
Journal
Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon)
ISSN: 1879-1271
Titre abrégé: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8611877
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2022
Dec 2022
Historique:
received:
09
05
2022
revised:
21
10
2022
accepted:
09
11
2022
pubmed:
20
11
2022
medline:
20
11
2022
entrez:
19
11
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In clinical practice, even when the fixator is locked, a noticeable laxity of the construct can be observed. This study was designed to measure the stiffness of the fixator and to analyze the movements of the osteotomy site. Furthermore, the effect of three additional longitudinal rods on the locking of the construct was analyzed. Five synthetic tibia/fixator models (Model A) were tested under rotational torque (40 Nm) and axial compression (700 N). Three additional rigid rods were subsequently mounted, and the tests were repeated (Model B). The movements of the fixator as well as the osteotomy site were registered by a digital optical measurement system. Load- deformation curves, and so stiffness of the models, were calculated and compared. Under rotational and axial loadings, Model A was found to be less rigid than Model B (p = 0.034; p = 0.194). Notably, Model A showed a region of laxity around neutral rotational (ΔF = 5 Nm) and axial (ΔF = 16.64 N) loading before a linear deformation trend was measured. Concomitantly, greater osteotomy site movement was measured for Model A than for Model B under full loading (p = 0.05) and within the region of increased laxity (p = 0.042). The fixator showed an element of laxity around neutral axial and rotational loading, which transferred to the bone and led to a notable amount of osteotomy gap movement. Mounting three additional rods increased the stiffness of the construct and therefore reduced the movement of the osteotomy site.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In clinical practice, even when the fixator is locked, a noticeable laxity of the construct can be observed. This study was designed to measure the stiffness of the fixator and to analyze the movements of the osteotomy site. Furthermore, the effect of three additional longitudinal rods on the locking of the construct was analyzed.
METHODS
METHODS
Five synthetic tibia/fixator models (Model A) were tested under rotational torque (40 Nm) and axial compression (700 N). Three additional rigid rods were subsequently mounted, and the tests were repeated (Model B). The movements of the fixator as well as the osteotomy site were registered by a digital optical measurement system. Load- deformation curves, and so stiffness of the models, were calculated and compared.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Under rotational and axial loadings, Model A was found to be less rigid than Model B (p = 0.034; p = 0.194). Notably, Model A showed a region of laxity around neutral rotational (ΔF = 5 Nm) and axial (ΔF = 16.64 N) loading before a linear deformation trend was measured. Concomitantly, greater osteotomy site movement was measured for Model A than for Model B under full loading (p = 0.05) and within the region of increased laxity (p = 0.042).
INTERPRETATION
CONCLUSIONS
The fixator showed an element of laxity around neutral axial and rotational loading, which transferred to the bone and led to a notable amount of osteotomy gap movement. Mounting three additional rods increased the stiffness of the construct and therefore reduced the movement of the osteotomy site.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36401977
pii: S0268-0033(22)00250-9
doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2022.105820
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
105820Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report that they have no conflicts of interest in the authorship and publication of this article. All work, including writing, was done by the authors.