Biomechanical evaluation of a central collinear entry reconstruction nail for femoral neck fracture prophylaxis

被引:0
|
作者
Shah, Sapan [1 ]
Huang, Dave T. [1 ,2 ]
Marecek, Geoffrey [1 ]
Huang, Kevin [1 ]
Metzger, Melodie F. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Los Angeles, CA USA
[2] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Orthopaed Biomech Lab, Los Angeles, CA USA
[3] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Dept Orthoped Surg, Orthoped Biomech Lab, 8700 Beverly Blvd,Davis Bldg Rm 6006, Los Angeles, CA 90048 USA
来源
INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED | 2024年 / 55卷 / 08期
关键词
Femoral neck; Prophylactic fixation; Central collinear; Piriformis; Trochanteric; PROXIMAL FEMUR FRACTURES; POINT;
D O I
10.1016/j.injury.2024.111640
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Introduction: Reconstruction nails are commonly used to treat proximal femur fractures, with cephalic screw placement for femoral neck "prophylaxis" becoming standard practice. These implants are traditionally introduced through piriformis fossa (PF) or greater trochanter (GT) entry portals. A third "central collinear" (CC) portal has been proposed that allows entry along the femoral anatomic axis and central placement of cephalic screws. The present study aimed to quantify and compare the CC portal femoral neck strength with the two traditional (PF and GT) entry portals. Materials and Methods: Eighteen cadaveric femur specimens (nine matched pairs) were divided into three groups using a balanced incomplete block design to control for variations in age and sex: (1) GT, (2) CC, and (3) PF entry points. Specimens and implants were cut to a standard length and instrumented with straight or valgus bend nails of appropriate laterality and two cephalic screws. Specimens were mounted on a custom jig replicating load distribution along the mechanical axis. A 100 N compressive preload was applied to the femoral head, followed by loading to failure at a rate of 10 mm/s until fracture, indicated by 30 % drop in axial force. Results: The three entry points did not differ in load-to-failure: GT (6378.7 +/- 1494.9 N), P (6912.4 +/- 4924.1 N) and CC (7044.2 +/- 2911.4 N) (P = 0.948) or maximum displacement, stiffness, and toughness. Most PF specimens failed at the basicervical neck, whereas most GT specimens failed at the subcapital neck; these differences were not significant. CC specimens failed evenly split between subcapital and basicervical. Conclusion: There were no significant difference in femoral neck load-to-failure after placement of a reconstruction nail through a CC entry portal when compared to both GT and PF entry. Clinically, this suggests the CC entry portal is a viable option when clinical considerations warrant its use.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A BIOMECHANICAL VALIDATION OF A NEW FEMORAL NECK FIXATION DYNAMIC HIP SCREW FOR PROXIMAL FEMORAL FRACTURE
    Lin, Shih-Wei
    Wang, Jaw-Lin
    BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING-APPLICATIONS BASIS COMMUNICATIONS, 2010, 22 (01): : 53 - 59
  • [42] Treatment of Pauwels type III femoral neck fracture with medial femoral neck support screw: a biomechanical and clinical study
    Zhichao Gao
    Mei Wang
    Baojie Shen
    Xiaodong Chu
    Di Ruan
    Scientific Reports, 11
  • [43] BIOMECHANICAL EVALUATION OF MEANS OF FIXATION OF THE FRACTURE OF THE NECK OF THE FEMUR
    BURNY, F
    ANDRIANNE, Y
    BOURGOIS, R
    DONKERWOLCKE, M
    JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS, 1980, 13 (09) : 802 - 802
  • [44] Impact of femoral neck system removal after femoral neck fracture healing on biomechanical stability and screw stripping risk
    Lee, Se-Won
    Pak, Jeongah
    Lim, Dohyung
    BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING LETTERS, 2025, 15 (02) : 349 - 355
  • [45] Treatment of Pauwels type III femoral neck fracture with medial femoral neck support screw: a biomechanical and clinical study
    Gao, Zhichao
    Wang, Mei
    Shen, Baojie
    Chu, Xiaodong
    Ruan, Di
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2021, 11 (01)
  • [46] Which femoral neck for a dual mobility cup? A biomechanical evaluation
    Julien Wegrzyn
    Jason Longaray
    Rafael Baez
    Lizeth Herrera
    International Orthopaedics, 2022, 46 : 1783 - 1793
  • [47] Which femoral neck for a dual mobility cup? A biomechanical evaluation
    Wegrzyn, Julien
    Longaray, Jason
    Baez, Rafael
    Herrera, Lizeth
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2022, 46 (08) : 1783 - 1793
  • [48] Cost-effectiveness analysis of proximal femoral nail versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture
    Kutlu, Gamze
    Akbulut, Yasemin
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2024, 19 (01):
  • [49] Biomechanical evaluation of a modified intramedullary nail for the treatment of unstable femoral trochanteric fractures
    Wang, Chaofeng
    Hou, Mingming
    Zhang, Congming
    Ma, Teng
    Li, Zhong
    Lin, Hua
    Zhang, Kun
    Huang, Qiang
    HELIYON, 2024, 10 (08)
  • [50] Internal fixation of femoral neck fractures with posterior comminutionA biomechanical comparison of DHS® and Intertan nail®
    Martin Rupprecht
    Lars Grossterlinden
    Kai Sellenschloh
    Michael Hoffmann
    Klaus Püschel
    Michael Morlock
    Johannes M. Rueger
    Wolfgang Lehmann
    International Orthopaedics, 2011, 35 : 1695 - 1701