Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Biomedical Engineering / Biomedizinische Technik

Joint Journal of the German Society for Biomedical Engineering in VDE and the Austrian and Swiss Societies for Biomedical Engineering and the German Society of Biomaterials

Editor-in-Chief: Dössel, Olaf

Editorial Board: Augat, Peter / Habibović, Pamela / Haueisen, Jens / Jahnen-Dechent, Wilhelm / Jockenhoevel, Stefan / Knaup-Gregori, Petra / Lenarz, Thomas / Leonhardt, Steffen / Plank, Gernot / Radermacher, Klaus M. / Schkommodau, Erik / Stieglitz, Thomas / Boenick, Ulrich / Jaramaz, Branislav / Kraft, Marc / Lenthe, Harry / Lo, Benny / Mainardi, Luca / Micera, Silvestro / Penzel, Thomas / Robitzki, Andrea A. / Schaeffter, Tobias / Snedeker, Jess G. / Sörnmo, Leif / Sugano, Nobuhiko / Werner, Jürgen /

6 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 1.096
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.492

CiteScore 2017: 0.48

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.202
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.356

Online
ISSN
1862-278X
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 63, Issue 6

Issues

Volume 57 (2012)

Biomechanical comparison of a novel monocortical and two common bicortical external fixation systems regarding rigidity and dynamic stability

Patrick A. VaradyORCID iD: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3032-4711 / Markus Greinwald
  • Institute of Biomechanics, Trauma Center Murnau, Murnau, Germany
  • Paracelsus Medical University, Institute of Biomechanics, Salzburg, Austria
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Peter Augat
  • Institute of Biomechanics, Trauma Center Murnau, Murnau, Germany
  • Paracelsus Medical University, Institute of Biomechanics, Salzburg, Austria
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2017-08-19 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2017-0051

Abstract

Aim:

To biomechanically compare a monocortical single frame external fixator (Orthofix UNYCO) with two bicortical fixator systems (dual frame: Stryker Hoffmann and single frame: Synthes LEF) with respect to system rigidity and stability under cyclic loading.

Methods:

The fixator systems were assessed for axial rigidity under loads which would occur clinically during fixator application and dynamic stability (cyclic fatigue) under loads which would occur in the first week postoperatively. Tests were performed on porcine tibiae (n>5 per group) with characteristic frame configurations. Loads were applied with an electrodynamic material testing machine and pin and frame deformations were continuously monitored with a marker based motion capturing system.

Results:

The bicortical single frame fixator revealed the largest rigidity (276±55) N/mm and was 20% (p=0.116) stiffer compared to the bicortical dual frame configuration and 39% (p=0.003) stiffer compared to the monocortical system. All systems survived 4000 cycles of loading, with the smallest vertical displacement (2.44±0.54 mm) observed for the bicortical dual frame system, followed by the monocortical single frame (3±0.55 mm, p=0.85) and bicortical single frame (3.25±0.96 mm, p=0.215).

Conclusion:

The monocortical fixation system performed comparably to the bicortical systems for its intended use as a temporary treatment before a definitive fracture osteosynthesis by plating or nailing.

Keywords: backed-out; bicortical; external fixation; monocortical

References

  • [1]

    AO Foundation. AO Surgery Reference; 2017. Available from: https://www2.aofoundation.org/wps/portal/surgery [cited 2017 Jan 7].

  • [2]

    Augat P, Burger J, Schorlemmer S, Henke T, Peraus M, Claes L. Shear movement at the fracture site delays healing in a diaphyseal fracture model. J Orthop Res 2003; 21: 1011–1017.Google Scholar

  • [3]

    Aziz MSR, Nicayenzi B, Crookshank MC, Bougherara H, Schemitsch EH, Zdero R. Biomechanical measurements of cortical screw purchase in five types of human and artificial humeri. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2014; 30: 159–167.Google Scholar

  • [4]

    Bigham-Sadegh A, Oryan A. Selection of animal models for pre-clinical strategies in evaluating the fracture healing, bone graft substitutes and bone tissue regeneration and engineering. Connect Tissue Res 2015; 56: 175–194.Google Scholar

  • [5]

    Dougherty PJ, Silverton C, Yeni Y, Tashman S, Weir R. Conversion from temporary external fixation to definitive fixation: shaft fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2006; 14: S124–S127.Google Scholar

  • [6]

    Haidukewych GJ. Temporary external fixation for the management of complex intra- and periarticular fractures of the lower extremity. J Orthop Trauma 2002; 16: 678–685.Google Scholar

  • [7]

    Harwood PJ, Giannoudis PV, Probst C, Krettek C, Pape H-C. The risk of local infective complications after damage control procedures for femoral shaft fracture. J Orthop Trauma 2006; 20: 178–186.Google Scholar

  • [8]

    Lavini F, Dall’Oca C, Mezzari S, et al. Temporary bridging external fixation in distal tibial fracture. Injury 2014; 45: S58–S63.Google Scholar

  • [9]

    Mathieu L, Bazile F, Barthelemy R, Duhamel P, Rigal S. Damage control orthopaedics in the context of battlefield injuries: the use of temporary external fixation on combat trauma soldiers. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2011; 97: 852–859.Google Scholar

  • [10]

    Moss DP, Tejwani NC. Biomechanics of external fixation: a review of the literature. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 2007; 65: 294–299.Google Scholar

  • [11]

    Pearce AI, Richards RG, Milz S, Schneider E, Pearce SG. Animal models for implant biomaterial research in bone: a review. Eur Cell Mater 2007; 13: 1–10.Google Scholar

  • [12]

    Possley DR, Burns TC, Stinner DJ, Murray CK, Wenke JC, Hsu JR. Temporary external fixation is safe in a combat environment. J Trauma 2010; 69: S135–S139.Google Scholar

  • [13]

    Seligson D. Evolution of the Hoffmann fixators. Injury 2015; 46: S3–S6.Google Scholar

  • [14]

    Sellei RM, Kobbe P, Dienstknecht T, et al. Biomechanical properties of different external fixator frame configurations. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 2015; 41: 313–318.Google Scholar

  • [15]

    Wehner T, Claes L, Simon U. Internal loads in the human tibia during gait. Clin Biomech 2009; 24: 299–302.Google Scholar

About the article

Corresponding author: Patrick A. Varady, PhD, Institute of Biomechanics, Trauma Center Murnau, Prof.-Küntscher-Str. 8, 82418 Murnau, Germany, Phone: +49 8841 48 4563, Fax: +49 8841 48 4573


Received: 2017-01-16

Accepted: 2017-07-10

Published Online: 2017-08-19

Published in Print: 2018-11-27


Citation Information: Biomedical Engineering / Biomedizinische Technik, Volume 63, Issue 6, Pages 665–672, ISSN (Online) 1862-278X, ISSN (Print) 0013-5585, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2017-0051.

Export Citation

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in