AO Research Institute Davos, Clavadelerstrasse 8, 7270, Davos, Switzerland.
Department of Trauma, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Int Orthop. 2023 Apr;47(4):1079-1087. doi: 10.1007/s00264-023-05710-3. Epub 2023 Feb 7.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Pubic ramus fractures account for the most common types of pelvic fractures. The standard surgical approach for superior pubic ramus fractures (SPRF) is a minimally invasive percutaneous screw fixation. However, percutaneous closed reduction and internal fixation of anterior pelvic ring injuries have high failure rates of up to 15%. The aim of this biomechanical study was to evaluate the stability of SPRF following stabilization with retrograde placed cannulated compression headless screw (CCHS) versus conventional fully and partially threaded screws in an artificial pelvic bone model.
SPRF type II as described by Nakatani et al. was created by means of osteotomies in eighteen anatomical composite hemi-pelvises. Specimens were stratified into three groups of six specimens each (n = 6) for fixation with either a 7.3 mm partially threaded cannulated screw (group RST), a 7.3 mm fully threaded cannulated screw (group RSV), or a 7.5 mm partially threaded cannulated CCHS (group CCS). Each hemi-pelvic specimen was tested in an inverted upright standing position under progressively increasing cyclic axial loading. The peak load, starting at 200 N, was monotonically increased at a rate of 0.1 N/cycle until 10 mm actuator displacement.
Total and torsional displacement were associated with higher values for RST versus CCS and RSV, with significant differences between RST and CCS for both these parameters (p ≤ 0.033). The differences between RST and RSV were significant for total displacement (p = 0.020), and a trend toward significance for torsional displacement (p = 0.061) was observed. For both failure criteria 2 mm total displacement and 5° torsional displacement, CCS was associated with significantly higher number of cycles compared to RST (p ≤ 0.040).
CCHS fixation presented predominantly superior stability to the standard surgical treatment and could therefore be a possible alternative implant for retrograde SPRF screw fixation, whereas partially threaded screws in group RST were associated with inferior biomechanical stability.
背景/目的:耻骨支骨折是最常见的骨盆骨折类型。耻骨支骨折(SPRF)的标准手术入路是微创经皮螺钉固定。然而,经皮闭合复位和前骨盆环损伤的内固定失败率高达 15%。本生物力学研究的目的是评估逆行放置无头加压空心螺钉(CCHS)与传统全螺纹和部分螺纹螺钉固定在人工骨盆模型中对耻骨支骨折的稳定性。
采用 Nakatani 等描述的耻骨支骨折 II 型模型,通过在 18 个解剖复合半骨盆上进行截骨来创建。标本分为三组,每组 6 个标本(n=6),分别用 7.3mm 部分螺纹空心螺钉(RST 组)、7.3mm 全螺纹空心螺钉(RSV 组)或 7.5mm 部分螺纹空心 CCHS(CCS 组)固定。每个半骨盆标本在倒置直立位下进行递增循环轴向加载测试。从 200N 开始,以 0.1N/循环的速度单调增加峰值载荷,直到 10mm 致动器位移。
与 CCS 和 RSV 相比,RST 的总位移和扭转位移均有较高值,RST 与 CCS 之间在这两个参数上有显著差异(p≤0.033)。RST 与 RSV 之间在总位移上有显著差异(p=0.020),在扭转位移上有显著趋势(p=0.061)。对于 2mm 总位移和 5°扭转位移这两个失效标准,CCS 与 RST 相比,所需的循环次数显著增加(p≤0.040)。
CCHS 固定术与标准手术治疗相比具有明显更高的稳定性,因此可能是逆行耻骨支螺钉固定的一种替代植入物,而 RST 组的部分螺纹螺钉则与较差的生物力学稳定性相关。