We have located links that may give you full text access.
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Fracture prevention by prophylactic femoroplasty of the proximal femur--metallic compared with cemented augmentation.
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 2014 July
OBJECTIVES: To compare 2 different femoral neck augmentation techniques at improving the mechanical strength of the femoral neck.
METHODS: Twenty pairs of human cadaveric femora were randomly divided into 2 groups. In 1 group, the femora were augmented with a steel spiral; the other group with the cemented technique. The untreated contralateral side served as an intraindividual control. Fracture strength was evaluated using an established biomechanical testing scenario mimicking a fall on the greater trochanter (Hayes fall).
RESULTS: The peak load to failure was significantly higher in the steel spiral group (P = 0.0024) and in the cemented group (P = 0.001) compared with the intraindividual controls. The peak load to failure showed a median of 3167 N (1825-5230 N) in the spiral group and 2485 N (1066-4395 N) in the spiral control group. The peak load to failure in the cemented group was 3698 N (SD ± 1249 N) compared with 2763 N (SD ± 1335 N) in the cement control group. Furthermore, fracture displacement was clearly reduced in the steel spiral group.
CONCLUSIONS: Femoral augmentations using steel spirals or cement-based femoroplasty are technically feasible procedures. Our results demonstrate that a prophylactic reinforced proximal femur has higher strength when compared with the untreated contralateral limb. Prophylactic augmentation has potential to become an auxiliary treatment option to protect the osteoporotic proximal femur against fracture.
METHODS: Twenty pairs of human cadaveric femora were randomly divided into 2 groups. In 1 group, the femora were augmented with a steel spiral; the other group with the cemented technique. The untreated contralateral side served as an intraindividual control. Fracture strength was evaluated using an established biomechanical testing scenario mimicking a fall on the greater trochanter (Hayes fall).
RESULTS: The peak load to failure was significantly higher in the steel spiral group (P = 0.0024) and in the cemented group (P = 0.001) compared with the intraindividual controls. The peak load to failure showed a median of 3167 N (1825-5230 N) in the spiral group and 2485 N (1066-4395 N) in the spiral control group. The peak load to failure in the cemented group was 3698 N (SD ± 1249 N) compared with 2763 N (SD ± 1335 N) in the cement control group. Furthermore, fracture displacement was clearly reduced in the steel spiral group.
CONCLUSIONS: Femoral augmentations using steel spirals or cement-based femoroplasty are technically feasible procedures. Our results demonstrate that a prophylactic reinforced proximal femur has higher strength when compared with the untreated contralateral limb. Prophylactic augmentation has potential to become an auxiliary treatment option to protect the osteoporotic proximal femur against fracture.
Full text links
Related Resources
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