Biomechanical Analysis of Headless Compression Screw Versus Tension Band Wiring for Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthrodesis.

PURPOSE

Proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthrodesis is a procedure employed to address arthritis, instability, and deformity. Multiple fixation methods are available to maintain stability across the arthrodesis interval, including headless compression screws (HCSs), tension band wiring (TBW), plating, and Kirschner wire constructs. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of the HCS and TBW techniques.

METHODS

Thirty-two nonthumb digits from the paired upper limbs of four fresh frozen cadavers were divided into pairs, matching contralateral digits from the same specimen. One PIP joint of each pair was fused with an antegrade 3.5 mm HCS, and the second was fused with TBW using 0.035 in. Kirschner wires with 24-gauge dental wire. Each construct was then stressed to 10 N in the radial deviation, ulnar deviation, flexion, and extension planes, and stiffness (N/mm) was calculated. The fingers were stressed to failure in extension with the ultimate load and mode of failure recorded.

RESULTS

When stressed in extension, the HCS construct had a significantly greater mean stiffness than the TBW construct (16.4 N/mm vs 10.8 N/mm). The stiffness in all other planes of motion were similar between the two constructs. The mean ultimate load to failure in extension was 91.4 N for the HCS and 41.9 N for the TBW. The most common mode of failure was fracture of the dorsal lip of the proximal phalanx (13/16) for the HCS and bending of the K-wires (15/16) for TBW.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthrodesis of the PIP joint using a HCS resulted in a construct that was significantly stiffer in extension with greater than double the load to failure compared to TBW.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Although the stiffness required to achieve successful PIP joint arthrodesis has not been well quantified, the HCS proved to be the most favorable construct with respect to initial strength and stability.