Tang Zhongjian, Zhang Yazhong, Huang Shaolong, Zhu Zhexi, Zhou Chengqiang, Zhu Ziqiang, Wang Yunqing, Wang Bin
Department of Orthopaedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of XuZhou Medical University, Xuzhou, China.
Graduate School of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, China.
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024 May 15;12:1358181. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1358181. eCollection 2024.
The objective of the present study is to conduct a comparative analysis of the biomechanical advantages and disadvantages associated with a biplanar double support screw (BDSF) internal fixation device.
Two distinct femoral neck fracture models, one with a 30° angle and the other with a 70° angle, were created using a verified and effective finite element model. Accordingly, a total of eight groups of finite element models were utilized, each implanted with different configurations of fixation devices, including distal screw 150° BDSF, distal screw 165° BDSF, 3 CLS arranged in an inverted triangle configuration, and 4 CLS arranged in a "α" configuration. Subsequently, the displacement and distribution of Von Mises stress (VMS) in the femur and internal fixation device were assessed in each fracture group under an axial load of 2100 N.
At Pauwels 30° Angle, the femur with a 150°-BDSF orientation exhibited a maximum displacement of 3.17 mm, while the femur with a 165°-BDSF orientation displayed a maximum displacement of 3.13 mm. When compared with the femoral neck fracture model characterized by a Pauwels Angle of 70°, the shear force observed in the 70° model was significantly higher than that in the 30° model. Conversely, the stability of the 30° model was significantly superior to that of the 70° model. Furthermore, in the 70° model, the BDSF group exhibited a maximum femur displacement that was lower than both the 3CCS (3.46 mm) and 4CCS (3.43 mm) thresholds.
The biomechanical properties of the BDSF internal fixation device are superior to the other two hollow screw internal fixation devices. Correspondingly, superior biomechanical outcomes can be achieved through the implementation of distal screw insertion at an angle of 165°. Thus, the BDSF internal fixation technique can be considered as a viable closed reduction internal fixation technique for managing femoral neck fractures at varying Pauwels angles.
本研究的目的是对双平面双支撑螺钉(BDSF)内固定装置的生物力学优缺点进行比较分析。
使用经过验证的有效有限元模型创建了两种不同的股骨颈骨折模型,一种为30°角,另一种为70°角。因此,总共使用了八组有限元模型,每组植入不同配置的固定装置,包括远端螺钉150°BDSF、远端螺钉165°BDSF、呈倒三角形配置的3枚交叉螺钉(CLS)以及呈“α”配置的4枚CLS。随后,在2100 N的轴向载荷下,评估每个骨折组中股骨和内固定装置的位移以及冯·米塞斯应力(VMS)分布。
在 Pauwels 30°角时,150° - BDSF 方向的股骨最大位移为3.17 mm,而165° - BDSF 方向的股骨最大位移为3.13 mm。与 Pauwels 角为70°的股骨颈骨折模型相比,70°模型中观察到的剪切力明显高于30°模型。相反,30°模型的稳定性明显优于70°模型。此外,在70°模型中,BDSF组的股骨最大位移低于3枚交叉螺钉组(3.46 mm)和4枚交叉螺钉组(3.43 mm)的阈值。
BDSF内固定装置的生物力学性能优于其他两种空心螺钉内固定装置。相应地,通过以165°角插入远端螺钉可实现更好的生物力学效果。因此,BDSF内固定技术可被视为一种可行的闭合复位内固定技术,用于治疗不同Pauwels角的股骨颈骨折。