Abstract
Aim
To establish whether the modified anatomic plate (MAP) performs as well as the anatomic
plate (AP), dynamic hip screw (DHS) and proximal femoral nail (PFN) from a biomechanical
perspective.
Materials and methods
The, AP, MAP, DHS and PFN were assessed using finite element (FE) methods and biomechanical
tests. A solid model was created based on the fracture lines and results were assessed
using analyses of variance.
Main outcome measurements
Independent variables were the implants (n = 4) and axial loads: 0–1000 Newton (N) in 100 N increments. Dependent variables were loads at the intertrochanteric fracture line
as measured by load cells.
Results
Axial loads ≤400 N generated significantly (p < 0.05) greater stress at the fracture line in both the FE model and biomechanical settings:
the PFN generated the highest forces at the fracture line followed by the AP, MAP
and DHS. For axial loads ≥400 N, the AP and DHS generated nonsignificant (p > 0.5) lower forces (almost 50% less) compared with the MAP and PFN. At 1000 N, the DHS generated the highest (p < 0.05) load at the fracture line.
Conclusion
The biomechanical features of the MAP were similar to those of the PFN. The MAP generated
optimal loads at both the fracture site and the proximal femur. FE methods and biomechanical
tests revealed that the MAP is associated with both intra- and extra-medullary fixation
features, even though the load was applied as an extramedullary stimulus.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to InjuryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- F1541-02 Standard specification and test methods for external skeletal fixation devices. annual book of astm standards 13.01.2002
- Finite element contact analysis of the hip joint.Med Biol Eng Comput. 2006; 44: 643-651
- Hip joint loading during walking and running, measured in two patients.J Biomech. 1993; 26: 969-990
- Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities.J Biomech. 2001; 34: 859-871
- Evaluation of stabilization methods of pelvic ring injuries by finite element modeling.Joint Dis Rel Surg. 2007; 18: 108-115
- A comparative analysis of different for distal femur fractures using the finite element method.Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. 2004; 7: 245-256
- Statistical methods in finite element analysis.J Biomech. 2002; 35: 1155-1161
- The effect of impact direction on the structural capacity of the proximal femur during falls.J Bone Miner Res. 1996; 11: 377-383
- Trochanteric fractures of the femur, treatment and results.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979; 138: 30-40
- İntertrochanteric fractures in high risk geriatric patients treated by external fixation.Orthopedics. 1985; 6: 769-774
- Finite element analysis of a bone-implant system with the proximal femur nail.Technol Health Care. 2006; 14: 411-419
- A survey of finite element analysis in orthopaedic biomechanics: the first decade.J Biomech. 1983; 16 ([Review]): 385-409
- Mechanics of the treatment of hip injuries.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980; 146: 53-61
- Improved prediction of proximal femoral fracture load using nonlinear finite element models.Med Eng Phys. 2001; 23: 165-173
- Prediction of fracture location in the proximal femur using finite element models.Med Eng Phys. 2001; 23: 657-664
- Effect of force direction on femoral fracture load for two types of loading conditions.J Orthop Res. 2001; 19: 539-544
- Comparison of in situ and in vitro CT scan-based finite element model predictions of proximal femoral fracture load.Med Eng Phys. 2003; 25: 781-787
- Subtrochanteric fractures of the Femur. Results of treatment with 95 angle condylar blade plate.Clin. Orthop Relat Res. 1989; 238: 122-130
- Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: part I—linear analysis.J Biomech Eng. 1991; 113: 353-360
- Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: part II—nonlinear analysis.J Biomech Eng. 1991; 113: 361-365
- Stress distributions within the proximal femur during gait and falls: implications for osteoporotic fracture.Osteopor Int. 1995; 5: 252-261
- Simulation of hip fracture in sideways fall using a 3D finite element model of pelvis-femur-soft tissue complex with simplified representation of whole body.Med Eng Phys. 2007; 29: 1167-1178
- Dynamic hip screw compared with external fixation for treatment of osteoporotic pertrochanteric fractures.J Bone Joint Surg. 2005; 87: 753-759
- Effect of local density changes on the failure load of the proximal femur.J Orthop Res. 1999; 17: 661-667
- The usage of femur proximal anatomic plate in the treatment of subtrochanteric femur fractures.Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2007; 41: 36
- Integrity of the lateral femoral wall in intertrochanteric hip fractures: an important predictor of a reoperation.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89: 470-475
- On the mathematical analysis of stress in the human femur.J Biomech. 1972; 5: 203-215
- Subject-specific finite element models can accurately predict strain levels in long bones.J Biomech. 2007; 40: 2982-2989
- Development of a new design of hip protectors using finite element analysis and mechanical tests.Med Eng Phys. 2008; 30: 1186-1192
- Finite element study of intramedullary osteosynthesis in the treatment of trochanteric fractures of the hip: gamma and PFN.Injury. 2004; 35: 130-135
- Influence of muscular contractions on the stress analysis of distal femoral interlocking nailing.Clin Biomech. 2008; 23: 38-44
- Finite element study of trochanteric gamma nail for trochanteric fracture.Med Eng Phys. 2003; 25: 99-106
- Finite element analysis of a subtrochanteric fractured femur with dynamic hip screw, dynamic condylar screw, and proximal femur nail implants—a comparative study.Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]. 2008; 222: 117-127
- Extracting clinically relevant data from finite element simulations.Clin Biomech. 2005; 20: 451-454
- Acrylic cement creeps but does not allow much subsidence of femoral stems.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997; 79: 665-669
- Materials science and engineering an introduction.5th ed. John Wiley & Sons, Denver, USA2000 (p. 793)
- Critical evaluation of known bone material properties to realize anisotropic FE-simulation of the proximal femur.J Biomech. 2000; 33: 1325-1330
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
March 10,
2011
Identification
Copyright
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
