We have located links that may give you full text access.
Biomechanical comparison of bicortical versus unicortical screw placement of proximal tibia locking plates: a cadaveric model.
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 2008 July
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of bicortical with unicortical screws in a proximal tibial fracture cadaveric model.
SETTING: Biomechanics laboratory at a Level 1 trauma center.
PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Eight pairs (4 male and 4 female) of elderly (average age, 79 years; range, 63 to 104 years) cadaveric tibiae.
INTERVENTION: Osteotomies were performed in the proximal tibia to reproduce a 41-C2 bicondylar fracture pattern. The 4.5-mm proximal tibial periarticular locking plates (Smith-Nephew, Memphis, TN) were applied to the tibiae with 4 proximal bicortical or unicortical locking screws and 3 screws distal to the fracture site. The fixed tibiae were tested by using a materials testing machine (Instron, Canton, MA) with the axial load on the medial condyle.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The bicortical and unicortical constructs were compared for stiffness, yield load and displacement, and maximum load and displacement to failure.
RESULTS: : Bicortical screw placement significantly outperformed unicortical screw placement in stiffness (53.1 +/- 6.7 N/mm versus 35.6 +/- 7.2 N/mm, P < 0.002) and maximum load (476.5 +/- 83.8 N versus 258.9 +/- 62.1 N, P < 0.001) but the yield properties and the ultimate displacement were not significantly different.
CONCLUSION: Bicortical screw placement may provide a biomechanically superior construct than unicortical screw placement for the stabilization of unstable proximal tibia fractures.
SETTING: Biomechanics laboratory at a Level 1 trauma center.
PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Eight pairs (4 male and 4 female) of elderly (average age, 79 years; range, 63 to 104 years) cadaveric tibiae.
INTERVENTION: Osteotomies were performed in the proximal tibia to reproduce a 41-C2 bicondylar fracture pattern. The 4.5-mm proximal tibial periarticular locking plates (Smith-Nephew, Memphis, TN) were applied to the tibiae with 4 proximal bicortical or unicortical locking screws and 3 screws distal to the fracture site. The fixed tibiae were tested by using a materials testing machine (Instron, Canton, MA) with the axial load on the medial condyle.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The bicortical and unicortical constructs were compared for stiffness, yield load and displacement, and maximum load and displacement to failure.
RESULTS: : Bicortical screw placement significantly outperformed unicortical screw placement in stiffness (53.1 +/- 6.7 N/mm versus 35.6 +/- 7.2 N/mm, P < 0.002) and maximum load (476.5 +/- 83.8 N versus 258.9 +/- 62.1 N, P < 0.001) but the yield properties and the ultimate displacement were not significantly different.
CONCLUSION: Bicortical screw placement may provide a biomechanically superior construct than unicortical screw placement for the stabilization of unstable proximal tibia fractures.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app