Moroz T K, Finlay J B, Rorabeck C H, Bourne R B
Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, University of Western Ontario, University Hospital, London, Canada.
J Orthop Trauma. 1988;2(4):284-96.
Due to the increased popularity of external fixators for treating long-bone fractures, many devices are being introduced to the market. The choice of a particular fixation device depends on the anticipated loading conditions or the demands the fixator might encounter during the healing process. This study compares the biomechanical stability (rigidity, yield-load, failure-load) and load to produce 1 mm of fracture-gap displacement of various half-frames of five systems tested in axial compression, torsion, and both anterior-posterior and medial-lateral bending; the slippage tolerances of various interfaces of the universal joints or clamps were also analyzed. The frames were mounted on acrylic rods, with a midshaft transverse saw-cut, displaced by 10 mm, and set to standardized dimensions and tightened at set torques. In terms of stability, the Brooker and Hoffman systems are, in general, less stable than the RxFx, AO, and Orthofix fixators. The single half-frames of all systems, except the Orthofix, were particularly weak, and the double and stacked half-frames of each system were more stable.
由于外固定器在治疗长骨骨折方面越来越受欢迎，许多设备正被推向市场。特定固定装置的选择取决于预期的负荷条件或固定器在愈合过程中可能遇到的需求。本研究比较了在轴向压缩、扭转以及前后和内外侧弯曲测试中五个系统的各种半框架的生物力学稳定性（刚度、屈服载荷、破坏载荷）以及产生1毫米骨折间隙位移的载荷；还分析了万向节或夹具各种界面的滑动公差。将框架安装在丙烯酸棒上，在中轴处进行横向锯切，位移10毫米，并设置为标准尺寸，以设定扭矩拧紧。在稳定性方面，一般来说，布鲁克和霍夫曼系统不如RxFx、AO和奥托菲克斯固定器稳定。除奥托菲克斯外，所有系统的单一半框架特别薄弱，每个系统的双半框架和堆叠半框架更稳定。
