Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Nunes,Marcos Ceita
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Posser,Ticiano Dozza, Israel,Charles Leonardo, Spinelli,Leandro de Freitas, Calieron,Luis Gustavo, Kim,Jung Ho
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162019000300261
Resumo: Abstract Objective To analyze the stability of humerus supracondylar fracture fixation with Kirschner wires comparing intramedullary and lateral (Fi), and two parallel lateral wires (FL) fixation in experimental models, to define which configuration presents greater stability. Methods A total of 72 synthetic humeri were cross-sectioned to simulate the fracture. These bones were divided into two equal groups and the fractures were fixed with parallel Kirschner wires (FL) and with a lateral and intramedullary (Fi) wire. Then, the test specimens were subjected to stress load tests on a universal test machine, measured in Newtons (N). Each group was subdivided into varus load, valgus, extension, flexion, external rotation and internal rotation. An analysis of the data was performed comparing the subgroups of the FL group with their respective subgroups of the Fi group through the two-tailed t test. Results The two-tailed t test showed that in 4 of the 6 evaluated conditions there was no significant statistical difference between the groups (p > 0.05). We have found a significant difference between the group with extension load with a mean of 19 N (FL group) and of 28.7 N (Fi group) (p = 0.004), and also between the groups with flexural load with themean of the forces recorded in the FL group of 17.1 N and of 22.9 N in the Fi group (p = 0.01). Conclusion Fixation with one intramedullary wire and one lateral wire, considering loads in extension and flexion, presents greater stability when compared to a fixation with two lateral wires, suggesting similar clinical results.
id SBOT-2_9db238e31b77c6053ddb67358c215f90
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0102-36162019000300261
network_acronym_str SBOT-2
network_name_str Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Modelbiomechanical phenomenaepiphyses/injuriesfracture fixationhumeral fracturesAbstract Objective To analyze the stability of humerus supracondylar fracture fixation with Kirschner wires comparing intramedullary and lateral (Fi), and two parallel lateral wires (FL) fixation in experimental models, to define which configuration presents greater stability. Methods A total of 72 synthetic humeri were cross-sectioned to simulate the fracture. These bones were divided into two equal groups and the fractures were fixed with parallel Kirschner wires (FL) and with a lateral and intramedullary (Fi) wire. Then, the test specimens were subjected to stress load tests on a universal test machine, measured in Newtons (N). Each group was subdivided into varus load, valgus, extension, flexion, external rotation and internal rotation. An analysis of the data was performed comparing the subgroups of the FL group with their respective subgroups of the Fi group through the two-tailed t test. Results The two-tailed t test showed that in 4 of the 6 evaluated conditions there was no significant statistical difference between the groups (p > 0.05). We have found a significant difference between the group with extension load with a mean of 19 N (FL group) and of 28.7 N (Fi group) (p = 0.004), and also between the groups with flexural load with themean of the forces recorded in the FL group of 17.1 N and of 22.9 N in the Fi group (p = 0.01). Conclusion Fixation with one intramedullary wire and one lateral wire, considering loads in extension and flexion, presents greater stability when compared to a fixation with two lateral wires, suggesting similar clinical results.Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia2019-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162019000300261Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia v.54 n.3 2019reponame:Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)instacron:SBOT10.1055/s-0039-1688756info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessNunes,Marcos CeitaPosser,Ticiano DozzaIsrael,Charles LeonardoSpinelli,Leandro de FreitasCalieron,Luis GustavoKim,Jung Hoeng2019-07-24T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-36162019000300261Revistahttp://www.rbo.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||rbo@sbot.org.br1982-43780102-3616opendoar:2019-07-24T00:00Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
spellingShingle Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
Nunes,Marcos Ceita
biomechanical phenomena
epiphyses/injuries
fracture fixation
humeral fractures
title_short Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_full Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_fullStr Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
title_sort Biomechanical Analysis of Two Types of Humerus Supracondylar Fracture Fixation in Anatomical Model
author Nunes,Marcos Ceita
author_facet Nunes,Marcos Ceita
Posser,Ticiano Dozza
Israel,Charles Leonardo
Spinelli,Leandro de Freitas
Calieron,Luis Gustavo
Kim,Jung Ho
author_role author
author2 Posser,Ticiano Dozza
Israel,Charles Leonardo
Spinelli,Leandro de Freitas
Calieron,Luis Gustavo
Kim,Jung Ho
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Nunes,Marcos Ceita
Posser,Ticiano Dozza
Israel,Charles Leonardo
Spinelli,Leandro de Freitas
Calieron,Luis Gustavo
Kim,Jung Ho
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv biomechanical phenomena
epiphyses/injuries
fracture fixation
humeral fractures
topic biomechanical phenomena
epiphyses/injuries
fracture fixation
humeral fractures
description Abstract Objective To analyze the stability of humerus supracondylar fracture fixation with Kirschner wires comparing intramedullary and lateral (Fi), and two parallel lateral wires (FL) fixation in experimental models, to define which configuration presents greater stability. Methods A total of 72 synthetic humeri were cross-sectioned to simulate the fracture. These bones were divided into two equal groups and the fractures were fixed with parallel Kirschner wires (FL) and with a lateral and intramedullary (Fi) wire. Then, the test specimens were subjected to stress load tests on a universal test machine, measured in Newtons (N). Each group was subdivided into varus load, valgus, extension, flexion, external rotation and internal rotation. An analysis of the data was performed comparing the subgroups of the FL group with their respective subgroups of the Fi group through the two-tailed t test. Results The two-tailed t test showed that in 4 of the 6 evaluated conditions there was no significant statistical difference between the groups (p > 0.05). We have found a significant difference between the group with extension load with a mean of 19 N (FL group) and of 28.7 N (Fi group) (p = 0.004), and also between the groups with flexural load with themean of the forces recorded in the FL group of 17.1 N and of 22.9 N in the Fi group (p = 0.01). Conclusion Fixation with one intramedullary wire and one lateral wire, considering loads in extension and flexion, presents greater stability when compared to a fixation with two lateral wires, suggesting similar clinical results.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162019000300261
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162019000300261
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1055/s-0039-1688756
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia v.54 n.3 2019
reponame:Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
instacron:SBOT
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
instacron_str SBOT
institution SBOT
reponame_str Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
collection Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||rbo@sbot.org.br
_version_ 1752122361944997888