Primary stability in locking plate fixation for proximal humeral fractures may be increased by using an additional nail osteosynthesis in combination with locking plate osteosynthesis-A biomechanical comparison.

Fracture fixation Humeral fractures Internal Intramedullary nail fixation Locking plate fixation Osteoporotic fractures Proximal

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:
28 Mar 2024
Historique:
received: 04 10 2023
revised: 25 03 2024
accepted: 26 03 2024
medline: 30 3 2024
pubmed: 30 3 2024
entrez: 29 3 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Stability is regarded as an important factor for proper healing and avoiding secondary dislocation in osteoporotic fractures of the proximal humerus. Several surgical techniques have been proposed for treatment, including intramedullary nail osteosynthesis and locking plate fixation. This study introduces a novel approach that combines both techniques and compares its primary stability with conventional methods. The study involved 25 osteoporotic humeri with two-part fracture models, which were randomly assigned to locking-plate fixation, intramedullary nailing, or a combination of both techniques. The specimens were subjected to sinusoidal loading at 250 N in 20° abduction for 5000 cycles and then to quasi-static loading until failure. Fracture movement, failure mode, and failure load were measured and compared among the groups. The groups fixated with intramedullary nailing and the groups fixated with intramedullary nailing and locking plate fixation showed significantly lower fracture motion than the group using locking plate fixation only (p < 0.005) and significantly higher load to failure (p = 0.007 and p = 0.0062, respectively). There was no significant difference between the group using intramedullary nailing and the group using locking-plate fixation and intramedullary nailing in fracture movement or load-to-failure (p > 0.005). The results indicate that locking plate fixation provides less primary stability than intramedullary nailing or the combined of both techniques. This combined approach may offer advantages as a treatment for complex proximal humeral fractures in osteoporotic bone, and specific implants should be developed to ensure optimal treatment.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Stability is regarded as an important factor for proper healing and avoiding secondary dislocation in osteoporotic fractures of the proximal humerus. Several surgical techniques have been proposed for treatment, including intramedullary nail osteosynthesis and locking plate fixation. This study introduces a novel approach that combines both techniques and compares its primary stability with conventional methods.
METHODS METHODS
The study involved 25 osteoporotic humeri with two-part fracture models, which were randomly assigned to locking-plate fixation, intramedullary nailing, or a combination of both techniques. The specimens were subjected to sinusoidal loading at 250 N in 20° abduction for 5000 cycles and then to quasi-static loading until failure. Fracture movement, failure mode, and failure load were measured and compared among the groups.
FINDINGS RESULTS
The groups fixated with intramedullary nailing and the groups fixated with intramedullary nailing and locking plate fixation showed significantly lower fracture motion than the group using locking plate fixation only (p < 0.005) and significantly higher load to failure (p = 0.007 and p = 0.0062, respectively). There was no significant difference between the group using intramedullary nailing and the group using locking-plate fixation and intramedullary nailing in fracture movement or load-to-failure (p > 0.005).
INTERPRETATION CONCLUSIONS
The results indicate that locking plate fixation provides less primary stability than intramedullary nailing or the combined of both techniques. This combined approach may offer advantages as a treatment for complex proximal humeral fractures in osteoporotic bone, and specific implants should be developed to ensure optimal treatment.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38552372
pii: S0268-0033(24)00067-6
doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106235
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

106235

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests. Tobias Schoebel reports financial support was provided by German Arthrosis Aid. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Tobias Schöbel (T)

Department of Orthopedic, Trauma, and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103 Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: tobias.schoebel@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Maximilian Gemkow (M)

Department of Orthopedic, Trauma, and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103 Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: maximilian.gemkow@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Toni Wendler (T)

Department of Orthopedic, Trauma, and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; ZESBO - Center for Research on Musculoskeletal Systems, Semmelweisstraße 14, 04103 Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: toni.wendler@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Stefan Schleifenbaum (S)

Department of Orthopedic, Trauma, and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; ZESBO - Center for Research on Musculoskeletal Systems, Semmelweisstraße 14, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; Fraunhofer Institute for Machine Tools and Forming Technology, Nöthnitzer Straße 44, 01187 Dresden, Germany. Electronic address: stefan.schleifenbaum@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Sabine Löffler (S)

Institute of Anatomy, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 13, 04103 Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: sabine.loeffler@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Jan Theopold (J)

Department of Orthopedic, Trauma, and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103 Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: jan.theopold@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Pierre Hepp (P)

Department of Orthopedic, Trauma, and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103 Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: pierre.hepp@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Classifications MeSH