1. Biomechanical characteristics of rib fracture fixation systems.
- Author
-
Prins JTH, Van Wijck SFM, Leeflang SA, Kleinrensink GJ, Lottenberg L, de la Santa Barajas PM, Van Huijstee PJ, Vermeulen J, Verhofstad MHJ, Zadpoor AA, Wijffels MME, and Van Lieshout EMM
- Subjects
- Humans, Biomechanical Phenomena, Bone Screws, Bone Plates, Ribs, Fracture Fixation, Fracture Fixation, Internal, Rib Fractures surgery
- Abstract
Background: The primary aim of this study was to determine and compare the biomechanical properties of a fractured or intact rib after implant fixation on an embalmed thorax., Methods: Five systems were fixated on the bilateral fractured or intact (randomly allocated) 6th to 10th rib of five post-mortem embalmed human specimens. Each rib underwent a four-point bending test to determine the bending structural stiffness (Newton per m
2 ), load to failure (Newton), failure mode, and the relative difference in bending structural stiffness and load to failure as compared to a non-fixated intact rib., Findings: As compared to a non-fixated intact rib, the relative difference in stiffness of a fixated intact rib ranged from -0.14 (standard deviation [SD], 0.10) to 0.53 (SD 0.35) and for a fixated fractured rib from -0.88 (SD 0.08) to 0.17 (SD 0.50). The most common failure mode was a new fracture at the most anterior drill hole for the plate and screw systems and a new fracture within the anterior portion of the implant for the clamping systems., Interpretation: The current fixation systems differ in their design, mode of action, and biomechanical properties. Differences in biomechanical properties such as stiffness and load to failure especially apply to fractured ribs. Insight in the differences between the systems might guide more specific implant selection and increase the surgeon's awareness for localizing hardware complaints or failure., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: EMM Van Lieshout reports a relationship with Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development that includes: funding grants. MME Wijffels reports a relationship with Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development that includes: funding grants. EMM Van Lieshout reports a relationship with DePuy Synthes that includes: funding grants. MME Wijffels reports a relationship with DePuy Synthes that includes: funding grants. EMM Van Lieshout reports a relationship with Coolsingel Foundation that includes: funding grants. MME Wijffels reports a relationship with Coolsingel Foundation that includes: funding grants. EMM Van Lieshout reports a relationship with Osteosynthesis and Trauma Care Foundation that includes: funding grants. MME Wijffels reports a relationship with Osteosynthesis and Trauma Care Foundation that includes: funding grants., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF