Schmutz Beat, Amarathunga Jayani, Kmiec Stanley, Yarlagadda Prasad, Schuetz Michael
Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, 60 Musk Avenue, Kelvin Grove, QLD, 4059, Australia.
DePuy Synthes, 1301 Goshen Parkway, West Chester, PA, 19380, USA.
J Orthop Surg Res. 2016 Apr 27;11(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s13018-016-0389-7.
The radius of curvature (ROC) misfit of cephalomedullary nails during anterograde nailing can lead to complications such as distal anterior cortical encroachment. This study quantified the anatomical fit of a new nail with 1.0-m ROC (TFN-ADVANCED(™) Proximal Femoral Nailing System [TFNA]) compared with a nail with 1.5-m ROC (Gamma3 Long Nail R1.5 [Gamma3]).
We generated 63 three-dimensional models (48 female, 45 right femur) representing the cortical surfaces of the femora (31 Caucasian, 28 Japanese, and 4 Thai). The mean age of the specimens was 77 years (±8.1), and the mean height was 158.5 cm (±9.6). Utilizing a customized software tool, nail fit was determined from the total surface area of nail protrusion from the inner cortex surface and maximum distance of nail protrusion in the axial plane; the position of the distal nail tip within the canal was also determined.
Overall, TFNA had both a significantly smaller mean total surface area of nail protrusion (915.8 vs. 1181.6 mm(2); P < 0.05) and a mean maximum distance of nail protrusion in the axial plane (1.9 vs. 2.1 mm; P = 0.007) when compared with Gamma3. The mean total surface area of nail protrusion was significantly smaller with TFNA versus Gamma3 in both the Caucasian (P = 0.0009) and Asian (Japanese and Thai) samples (P = 0.000002); the mean maximum distance of TFNA protrusion was significantly smaller in Asians (P = 0.04), but not in Caucasians (P = 0.08). Most tip positions for both nail types were anterior, but TFNA had a higher number of center positions than Gamma3 (13 vs. 7) and a shift from the far anterior cortex to the center of the medullary canal (overall and in Caucasians). In Asians, the most prominent position was far anterior for both nails.
The 1.0-m ROC TFNA nail resulted in better fit than the 1.5-m ROC Gamma3 nail. Clinical trials and case studies should be conducted in the future to verify if these findings would also result in clinical improvements.
顺行髓内钉固定时,髓内钉的曲率半径(ROC)不匹配会导致诸如远端前皮质侵蚀等并发症。本研究对一种新的曲率半径为1.0米的髓内钉(TFN-ADVANCED(™) 股骨近端髓内钉系统 [TFNA])与曲率半径为1.5米的髓内钉(Gamma3长钉R1.5 [Gamma3])的解剖学适配性进行了量化。
我们生成了63个三维模型(48例女性,45根右侧股骨),代表股骨的皮质表面(31例白种人、28例日本人、4例泰国人)。标本的平均年龄为77岁(±8.1),平均身高为158.5厘米(±9.6)。利用定制软件工具,根据髓内钉从内皮质表面突出的总表面积以及轴向平面上髓内钉突出的最大距离来确定髓内钉的适配性;同时也确定了髓内钉远端尖端在髓腔内的位置。
总体而言,与Gamma3相比,TFNA的髓内钉突出总表面积均值显著更小(915.8 vs. 1181.6平方毫米;P < 0.05),轴向平面上髓内钉突出的平均最大距离也更小(1.9 vs. 2.1毫米;P = 0.007)。在白种人(P = 0.0009)和亚洲人(日本人及泰国人,P = 0.000002)样本中,TFNA的髓内钉突出总表面积均值均显著小于Gamma3;TFNA突出的平均最大距离在亚洲人(P = 0.04)中显著更小,但在白种人(P = 0.08)中并非如此。两种髓内钉类型的大多数尖端位置都在前侧,但TFNA位于中心位置的数量比Gamma3更多(分别为13个和7个),并且从远前皮质向髓腔中心偏移(总体及白种人样本中)。在亚洲人中,两种髓内钉最突出的位置均为远前侧。
曲率半径为1.0米的TFNA髓内钉比曲率半径为1.5米的Gamma3髓内钉适配性更好。未来应进行临床试验和病例研究,以验证这些发现是否也能带来临床改善。