Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

Home Current Issue Previous Issues For Authors Journal Info
Skip Navigation LinksHome > September 2008 - Volume 22 - Issue 8 > The Biomechanics of Ipsilateral Intertrochanteric and Femora...
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma:
September 2008 - Volume 22 - Issue 8 - pp 517-524
doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e31817d97bc
Original Article

The Biomechanics of Ipsilateral Intertrochanteric and Femoral Shaft Fractures: A Comparison of 5 Fracture Fixation Techniques

McConnell, Alison MSc(Eng); Zdero, Rad PhD; Syed, Khalid MD, FRCS(C); Peskun, Christopher BSc, MD; Schemitsch, Emil MD, FRCS(C)

Collapse Box

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to examine biomechanically 5 different construct combinations for fixation of ipsilateral intertrochanteric and femoral shaft fractures.

Methods: Twenty-five fresh-frozen adult human femora (age range = 58-91 years, average age = 75.4 years) were tested in physiological bending and in torsion to characterize initial bending and torsional stiffness and stiffness following fixation of combined intertrochanteric and femoral shaft fractures. Five fracture fixation device constructs were assessed-construct A: long dynamic hip screw (long DHS); construct B: reconstruction nail; construct C: DHS plus low-contact dynamic compression plate; construct D: DHS plus retrograde intramedullary nail; and construct E: long intramedullary hip screw. Axial stiffness, torsional stiffness, and axial load-to-failure were the main measurements recorded.

Results: There were no differences between constructs in terms of axial stiffness (P = 0.41), external rotation stiffness (P = 0.13), and axial load-to-failure (P = 0.16). However, there was a borderline statistically significant difference in internal rotation stiffness between the constructs (P = 0.048). Specifically, construct C was significantly stiffer than construct E (P = 0.04).

Conclusions: All constructs showed no statistical differences when compared with one another, with the exception of construct E, which provided the least torsional stiffness. However, the current in vitro model did not simulate fracture healing or support offered by soft tissues, both of which would affect the stiffness and load-to-failure levels reached.

© 2008 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

You currently do not have access to this article.

You may need to:

Note: If your society membership provides for full-access to this article, you may need to login on your society’s web site first.

Article Tools

You currently do not have access to this article.

You may need to:

Note: If your society membership provides for full-access to this article, you may need to login on your society’s web site first.

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.