• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

传统与螺旋刀片螺钉置入方法在后取出股骨头螺钉的比较:应用伽玛 3 型锁定钉与股骨近端防旋髓内钉的生物力学评估。

Conventional versus helical blade screw insertion following the removal of the femoral head screw: a biomechanical evaluation using trochanteric gamma 3 locking nail versus PFN antirotation.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Gwangju Veterans Hospital, 99 Cheomdanwolbong-ro, Gwangsan-gu, Gwangju, 62284, South Korea.

Osong Medical Innovation Foundation, Medical Device Development Center, Cheongju, South Korea.

出版信息

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Sep 8;22(1):767. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04658-y.

DOI:10.1186/s12891-021-04658-y
PMID:34496801
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8428115/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

When a hip screw needs to be changed, choosing between the conventional (C-type) and helical blade (H-type) types is difficult. In this biomechanical study, we compared these two screw types relative to the type of the initial screw used.

METHODS

C- or H-type screws were inserted (leading screw) in three types of polyurethane bone models (Sawbone, Pacific Research Laboratories, Inc., Washington, USA: 130 × 180 × 40 mm) of different bone mineral densities (pounds per cubic feet [PCF] 5, 80 kg/m; PCF 10, 160 kg/m; and PCF 15, 240 kg/m), and then successively or alternately inserted (following screw) after the leading screw removal. An original model (original C and H) of a leading screw without removal was created as a control. The strengths of resistance to pullout (PO) and rotational stress were measured. For each experimental condition, there were 30 experimental models.

RESULTS

The original C screw was superior in PO strength, and the original H-type screw was superior in rotational strength. When the C- or H-type screw was the leading screw, using the C-type screw again as the following screw (C1-C2, H1-C2) showed the greatest resistance to PO, and using the H-type screw as the following screw (C1-H2, H1-H2) showed superior resistance to rotational strength. However, the rotational strength of the C2 screw decreased by more than 50% compared with that of the original C screw. Moreover, the PO and rotational strengths of the H2 screw decreased to less than 30% overall compared with those of the original H screw.

CONCLUSION

The H-type screw should be used for second-time screw insertion procedures in cases where it is difficult to choose between PO and rotational strengths.

摘要

目的

当需要更换髋螺钉时,在传统(C 型)和螺旋刀片(H 型)之间进行选择较为困难。在这项生物力学研究中,我们比较了这两种螺钉类型与初始螺钉类型的关系。

方法

在三种不同骨密度(磅每立方英尺[PCF]5,80kg/m;PCF10,160kg/m;和 PCF15,240kg/m)的聚氨酯骨模型(Sawbone,Pacific Research Laboratories,Inc.,华盛顿州:130×180×40mm)中分别插入 C 型或 H 型螺钉(主导螺钉),然后在取出主导螺钉后,依次或交替插入(后续螺钉)。创建一个没有取出的主导螺钉的原始模型(原始 C 和 H)作为对照。测量抗拔出强度(PO)和旋转强度。对于每种实验条件,有 30 个实验模型。

结果

原始 C 螺钉在 PO 强度方面表现优异,而原始 H 型螺钉在旋转强度方面表现优异。当 C 型或 H 型螺钉为主导螺钉时,再次使用 C 型螺钉作为后续螺钉(C1-C2,H1-C2)时,其抗 PO 能力最强,而使用 H 型螺钉作为后续螺钉(C1-H2,H1-H2)时,其抗旋转强度最强。然而,C2 螺钉的旋转强度比原始 C 螺钉降低了 50%以上。此外,H2 螺钉的 PO 和旋转强度总体上降低到原始 H 螺钉的 30%以下。

结论

在难以选择 PO 和旋转强度时,应选择 H 型螺钉进行二次螺钉插入操作。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/ddb35b331ce5/12891_2021_4658_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/d9293ff6d7d2/12891_2021_4658_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/1de177f9db7b/12891_2021_4658_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/171bae483266/12891_2021_4658_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/83166e9f8e12/12891_2021_4658_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/ddb35b331ce5/12891_2021_4658_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/d9293ff6d7d2/12891_2021_4658_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/1de177f9db7b/12891_2021_4658_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/171bae483266/12891_2021_4658_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/83166e9f8e12/12891_2021_4658_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e6f/8428115/ddb35b331ce5/12891_2021_4658_Fig5_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Conventional versus helical blade screw insertion following the removal of the femoral head screw: a biomechanical evaluation using trochanteric gamma 3 locking nail versus PFN antirotation.传统与螺旋刀片螺钉置入方法在后取出股骨头螺钉的比较:应用伽玛 3 型锁定钉与股骨近端防旋髓内钉的生物力学评估。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Sep 8;22(1):767. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04658-y.
2
Biomechanical characterisation of osteosyntheses for proximal femur fractures: helical blade versus screw.股骨近端骨折内固定术的生物力学特性:螺旋刀片与螺钉的比较
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;133:1-10.
3
[Comparison of 2-Screw Implant and Antirotational Blade Implant in Treatment of Trochanteric Fractures].2枚螺钉型与防旋刀片型植入物治疗股骨转子间骨折的比较
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2020;87(4):268-272.
4
Screw-blade fixation systems in Pauwels three femoral neck fractures: a biomechanical evaluation.Pauwels III型股骨颈骨折中的螺旋刀片固定系统:生物力学评估
Int Orthop. 2018 Feb;42(2):409-418. doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3587-y. Epub 2017 Aug 6.
5
C1 pedicle screws versus C1 lateral mass screws: comparisons of pullout strengths and biomechanical stabilities.C1椎弓根螺钉与C1侧块螺钉:拔出强度和生物力学稳定性的比较
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Feb 15;34(4):371-7. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318193a21b.
6
Screw-blade fixation systems for implant anchorage in the femoral head: Horizontal blade orientation provides superior stability.螺旋叶片固定系统在股骨头植入物锚固中的应用:水平叶片方向提供了更好的稳定性。
Injury. 2021 Jul;52(7):1861-1867. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.04.058. Epub 2021 May 1.
7
Biomechanical analysis analyzing association between bone mineral density and lag screw migration.生物力学分析分析骨密度与拉力螺钉迁移之间的关系。
Sci Rep. 2023 Jan 13;13(1):747. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-27860-5.
8
Rotationally stable screw-anchor versus sliding hip screw plate systems in stable trochanteric femur fractures: a biomechanical evaluation.稳定型转子间骨折中螺旋钉-锚钉与滑动髋螺钉钢板系统的生物力学比较。
J Orthop Trauma. 2013 Jun;27(6):e127-36. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e318278112a.
9
Gamma 3 U-Blade lag screws in patients with trochanteric femur fractures: are rotation control lag screws better than others?Gamma 3 U 型刀片髋螺钉治疗转子间股骨骨折:旋转控制型髋螺钉优于其他类型吗?
J Orthop Surg Res. 2019 Dec 16;14(1):440. doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1427-z.
10
Factors affecting the pullout strength of self-drilling and self-tapping anterior cervical screws.影响自钻自攻型颈椎前路螺钉拔出强度的因素
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Jan 1;28(1):9-13. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200301010-00004.

引用本文的文献

1
Appropriate treatment for nail breakage following femur intertrochanteric fractures without additional reduction: case series and literature review.股骨转子间骨折后指甲破损无需额外复位的适当治疗:病例系列及文献综述
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025 May 9;26(1):454. doi: 10.1186/s12891-025-08669-x.
2
Forces required to dynamize sliding screws in gamma nail and selfdynamizable internal fixator.动态滑动螺钉在伽马钉和自动态内固定器中所需的力。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 Apr 8;25(1):271. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07392-3.
3
Comparison of helical blade versus lag screw in intertrochanteric fractures of the elderly treated with proximal femoral nail: A meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials.

本文引用的文献

1
Bone cement augmentation of femoral nail head elements increases their cut-out resistance in poor bone quality- A biomechanical study.骨水泥增强股骨钉头元素可增加其在骨质差情况下的穿出阻力-一项生物力学研究。
J Biomech. 2021 Mar 30;118:110301. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110301. Epub 2021 Feb 4.
2
Risk factors for mechanical failure of intertrochanteric fractures after fixation with proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA II): a study in a Southeast Asian population.股骨近端抗旋髓内钉(PFNA II)固定后股骨转子间骨折机械性失败的危险因素:一项针对东南亚人群的研究
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021 Apr;141(4):569-575. doi: 10.1007/s00402-020-03399-2. Epub 2020 Apr 15.
3
股骨近端钉治疗老年股骨转子间骨折中螺旋刀片与拉力螺钉的比较:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Jt Dis Relat Surg. 2022;33(3):695-704. doi: 10.52312/jdrs.2022.789. Epub 2022 Oct 14.
Is PFNA-II a better implant for stable intertrochanteric fractures in elderly population ? A prospective randomized study.
对于老年人群的稳定型转子间骨折,PFNA-II 是一种更好的植入物吗?一项前瞻性随机研究。
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2019 Oct;10(Suppl 1):S71-S76. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2019.02.004. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
4
Is rotation the mode of failure in pertrochanteric fractures fixed with nails? Theoretical approach and illustrative cases.髓内钉固定治疗股骨转子间骨折时,旋转是骨折失败的模式吗?理论探讨与病例分析
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2020 Feb;30(2):199-205. doi: 10.1007/s00590-019-02557-6. Epub 2019 Sep 20.
5
Reduced complication rates for unstable trochanteric fractures managed with third-generation nails: Gamma 3 nail versus PFNA.第三代髓内钉治疗不稳定转子间骨折的并发症发生率降低:Gamma 3 钉与 PFNA 比较。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020 Oct;46(5):955-962. doi: 10.1007/s00068-019-01200-7. Epub 2019 Sep 13.
6
Clinical Outcomes of U-blade Gamma3 Nails Used to Treat Patients with Trochanteric Fractures: Retrospective Multicenter Study.使用U型Gamma3钉治疗转子间骨折患者的临床结果:回顾性多中心研究
Hip Pelvis. 2019 Jun;31(2):95-101. doi: 10.5371/hp.2019.31.2.95. Epub 2019 May 30.
7
The Treatment Strategies for Failed Fixation of Intertrochanteric Fractures.转子间骨折固定失败的治疗策略。
Injury. 2019 Jul;50(7):1339-1346. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.05.012. Epub 2019 May 20.
8
Epidemiology, treatment and mortality of trochanteric and subtrochanteric hip fractures: data from the Swedish fracture register.转子间及转子下髋部骨折的流行病学、治疗与死亡率:来自瑞典骨折登记处的数据
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018 Oct 12;19(1):369. doi: 10.1186/s12891-018-2276-3.
9
Comparison of clinical outcomes with InterTan vs Gamma nail or PFNA in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures: A meta-analysis.InterTan 与 Gamma 钉或 PFNA 治疗股骨转子间骨折的临床疗效比较:Meta 分析。
Sci Rep. 2017 Nov 21;7(1):15962. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-16315-3.
10
Comparison of effects of different screw materials in the triangle fixation of femoral neck fractures.不同螺钉材料在股骨颈骨折三角固定中的效果比较
J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2017 May;28(5):81. doi: 10.1007/s10856-017-5890-y. Epub 2017 Apr 10.