Biomechanics of Upper Extremity Double Plating

Abstract

Double plating (DP) is an established treatment modality in traumatology. For certain indications, such as open reduction and internal fixation of bicondylar tibial plateau fractures and distal humeral fractures, DP is standard of care in the clinical routine. However, the principles of DP can be transferred to other anatomic regions and indications. In the past years, DP has been brought more and more into focus. For revision cases, such as the treatment of fracture non-unions, DP seems generally useful. In anatomical locations with high torsional stress and bending forces, but also in regions with traction forces by muscles and tendons DP provides multiplanar stability and therefore seems to have biomechanical advantages. Usually two smaller implants can replace one larger implant. Thus, the number of points of fixation can be increased, the stability can be improved and soft-tissue irritations by bulky implants can be minimized. Along with the established indication and application at the distal humerus, there is biomechanical evidence in the current literature for DP of clavicle fractures and humeral shaft fractures. Furthermore, DP provides mechanical advantages in the treatment of certain proximal humeral fractures and olecranon fractures. This review of the literature summarizes the published literature on biomechanics of upper extremity DP.

Key words

double plating - biomechanics - upper extremity - dual plating - fracture - non-union

• References/Literatur

• 1 Schnetzke M, Bockmeyer J, Porschke F. et al. Quality of reduction influences outcome after locked-plate fixation of proximal humeral Type-C fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2016; 98: 1777-1785 doi:10.2106/JBJS.16.00112
• 2 Schliemann B, Wähnert D, Theisen C. et al. How to enhance the stability of locking plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures? An overview of current biomechanical and clinical data. Injury 2015; 46: 1207-1214
• 3 Katthagen JC, Lutz O, Voigt C. et al. Cement augmentation of humeral head screws reduces early implant-related complications after locked plating of proximal humeral fractures. Obere Extrem 2018; 13: 123-129 doi:10.1007/s11678-018-0440-x
• 4 Stoffel K, Cunneen S, Morgan R. et al. Comparative stability of perpendicular versus parallel double-locking plating systems in osteoporotic comminuted distal humerus fractures. J Orthop Res 2008; 26: 778-784 doi:10.1002/jor.20528
• 5 Zalavras CG, Vercillo MT, Jun BJ. et al. Biomechanical evaluation of parallel versus orthogonal plate fixation of intra-articular distal humerus fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011; 20: 12-20 doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.005
• 6 Kosters C, Lenschow S, Schulte-Zurhausen E. et al. Management of comminuted fractures of the distal humerus: clinical outcome after primary external fixation versus immediate fixation with locking plates. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137: 1693-1698 doi:10.1007/s00402-017-2792-x
• 7 Greiner S, Haas NP, Bail HJ. Outcome after open reduction and angular stable internal fixation for supra-intercondylar fractures of the distal humerus: preliminary results with the LCP distal humerus system. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2008; 128: 723-729 doi:10.1007/s00402-007-0428-2
• 8 Südkamp N, Bayer J, Hepp P. et al. Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures with use of the locking proximal humerus plate results of a prospective, multicenter, observational study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91: 1320-1328 doi:10.2106/Jbjs.H.00006
• 9 Wähnert D, Grüneweller N, Gehweiler D. et al. Double plating in Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic proximal femur fractures: a biomechanical study. J Orthop Res 2017; 35: 234-239 doi:10.1002/jor.23259
• 10 Wilson DJ, Scully WF, Min KS. et al. Biomechanical analysis of intramedullary vs. superior plate fixation of transverse midshaft clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2016; 25: 949-953 doi:10.1016/j.jse.2015.10.006
• 11 Celestre P, Roberston C, Mahar A. et al. Biomechanical evaluation of clavicle fracture plating techniques: does a locking plate provide improved stability?. J Orthop Trauma 2008; 22: 241-247 doi:10.1097/BOT.0b013e31816c7bac
• 12 Muenzberg M, Maurer KM, Stangl R. et al. Die biomechanische Testung einer multidirektionalen, anatomischen, winkelstabilen Plattenosteosynthese bei instabilen Mehrfragmentfrakturen des Klavikulaschaftes. Obere Extrem 2009; 4: 240-245 doi:10.1007/s11678-009-0048-2
• 13 Demirhan M, Bilsel K, Atalar AC. et al. Biomechanical comparison of fixation techniques in midshaft clavicular fractures. J Orthop Trauma 2011; 25: 272-278 doi:10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181ee3db7
• 14 Little KJ, Riches PE, Fazzi UG. Biomechanical analysis of locked and non-locked plate fixation of the clavicle. Injury 2012; 43: 921-925 doi:10.1016/j.injury.2012.02.007
• 15 Iannotti MR, Crosby LA, Stafford P. et al. Effects of plate location and selection on the stability of midshaft clavicle osteotomies: a biomechanical study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2002; 11: 457-462 doi:10.1067/mse.2002.125805
• 16 Hulsmans MH, van Heijl M, Houwert RM. et al. Surgical fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures: a systematic review of biomechanical studies. Injury 2018; 49: 753-765 doi:10.1016/j.injury.2018.02.017
• 17 Pulos N, Yoon RS, Shetye S. et al. Anteroinferior 2.7-mm versus 3.5-mm plating of the clavicle: a biomechanical study. Injury 2016; 47: 1642-1646 doi:10.1016/j.injury.2016.06.002
• 18 Prasarn ML, Meyers KN, Wilkin G. et al. Dual mini-fragment plating for midshaft clavicle fractures: a clinical and biomechanical investigation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2015; 135: 1655-1662 doi:10.1007/s00402-015-2329-0
• 19 Suter C, Majewski M, Nowakowski AM. Comparison of 2 plating techniques for lateral clavicle fractures, using a new standardized biomechanical testing setup. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2018; 16: 107-112 doi:10.5301/jabfm.5000377
• 20 Kuner EH, Siebler G. Luxationsfrakturen des proximalen Humerus-Ergebnisse nach operativer Behandlung. Unfallchirurgie 1987; 13: 64-71 doi:10.1007/BF02585983
• 21 Lill H, Lange K, Prasse-Badde J. et al. Die T-Platten-Osteosynthese bei dislozierten proximalen Humerusfrakturen. Unfallchirurgie 1997; 23: 183-190 doi:10.1007/BF02627436
• 22 Moonot P, Ashwood N, Hamlet M. Early results for treatment of three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus using the PHILOS plate system. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89: 1206-1209 doi:10.1302/0301-620X.89B9.18528
• 23 Sudkamp N, Bayer J, Hepp P. et al. Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures with use of the locking proximal humerus plate. Results of a prospective, multicenter, observational study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91: 1320-1328 doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00006
• 24 Jabran A, Peach C, Ren L. Biomechanical analysis of plate systems for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic literature review. Biomed Eng Online 2018; 17: 47 doi:10.1186/s12938-018-0479-3
• 25 Hessmann MH, Korner J, Hofmann A. et al. [Angle-fixed plate fixation or double-plate osteosynthesis in fractures of the proximal humerus: a biomechanical study]. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2008; 53: 130-137 doi:10.1515/BMT.2008.018
• 26 Wanner GA, Wanner-Schmid E, Romero J. et al. Internal fixation of displaced proximal humeral fractures with two one-third tubular plates. J Trauma 2003; 54: 536-544 doi:10.1097/01.TA.0000052365.96538.42
• 27 Choi S, Kang H, Bang H. Technical tips: dualplate fixation technique for comminuted proximal humerus fractures. Injury 2014; 45: 1280-1282 doi:10.1016/j.injury.2014.04.029
• 28 He Y, Zhang Y, Wang Y. et al. Biomechanical evaluation of a novel dualplate fixation method for proximal humeral fractures without medial support. J Orthop Surg Res 2017; 12: 72 doi:10.1186/s13018-017-0573-4
• 29 Theopold J, Marquass B, Fakler J. et al. The bicipital groove as a landmark for reconstruction of complex proximal humeral fractures with hybrid double plate osteosynthesis. BMC Surg 2016; 16: 10 doi:10.1186/s12893-016-0125-6
• 30 Chen AL, Joseph TN, Wolinksy PR. et al. Fixation stability of comminuted humeral shaft fractures: locked intramedullary nailing versus plate fixation. J Trauma 2002; 53: 733-737 doi:10.1097/01.TA.0000021908.65468.78
• 31 Hu X, Xu S, Lu H. et al. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis vs. conventional fixation techniques for surgically treated humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res 2016; 11: 59 doi:10.1186/s13018-016-0394-x
• 32 Gausden EB, Christ AB, Warner SJ. et al. The triceps-sparing posterior approach to plating humeral shaft fractures results in a high rate of union and low incidence of complications. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2016; 136: 1683-1689 doi:10.1007/s00402-016-2578-6
• 33 OʼToole RV, Andersen RC, Vesnovsky O. et al. Are locking screws advantageous with plate fixation of humeral shaft fractures? A biomechanical analysis of synthetic and cadaveric bone. J Orthop Trauma 2008; 22: 709-715 doi:10.1097/BOT.0b013e31818df8cb
• 34 Hak DJ, Althausen P, Hazelwood SJ. Locked plate fixation of osteoporotic humeral shaft fractures: are two locking screws per segment enough?. J Orthop Trauma 2010; 24: 207-211 doi:10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181bdd1da
• 35 Zheng YF, Zhou JL, Wang XH. et al. Biomechanical study of the fixation strength of anteromedial plating for humeral shaft fractures. Chin Med J (Engl) 2016; 129: 1850-1855 doi:10.4103/0366-6999.186645
• 36 Karakasli A, Basci O, Ertem F. et al. Dual plating for fixation of humeral shaft fractures: a mechanical comparison of various combinations of plate lengths. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2016; 50: 432-436 doi:10.1016/j.aott.2016.07.002
• 37 Kosmopoulos V, Nana AD. Dual plating of humeral shaft fractures: orthogonal plates biomechanically outperform side-by-side plates. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472: 1310-1317 doi:10.1007/s11999-013-3379-7
• 38 Tejwani NC, Murthy A, Park J. et al. Fixation of extra-articular distal humerus fractures using one locking plate versus two reconstruction plates: a laboratory study. J Trauma 2009; 66: 795-799 doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e318181e53c
• 39 Kudo T, Hara A, Iwase H. et al. Biomechanical properties of orthogonal plate configuration versus parallel plate configuration using the same locking plate system for intra-articular distal humeral fractures under radial or ulnar column axial load. Injury 2016; 47: 2071-2076 doi:10.1016/j.injury.2016.08.012
• 40 Shih CA, Su WR, Lin WC. et al. Parallel versus orthogonal plate osteosynthesis of adult distal humerus fractures: a meta-analysis of biomechanical studies. Int Orthop 2018; DOI: 10.1007/s00264-018-3937-4.
• 41 Hackl M, Wegmann K, Taibah S. et al. Peri-implant failure in dual plating of the distal humerus-a biomechanical analysis with regard to screw and plate positioning. Injury 2015; 46: 2142-2145 doi:10.1016/j.injury.2015.08.015
• 42 Gordon MJ, Budoff JE, Yeh ML. et al. Comminuted olecranon fractures: a comparison of plating methods. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2006; 15: 94-99 doi:10.1016/j.jse.2005.06.003
• 43 Wagner FC, Konstantinidis L, Hohloch N. et al. Biomechanical evaluation of two innovative locking implants for comminuted olecranon fractures under high-cycle loading conditions. Injury 2015; 46: 985-989 doi:10.1016/j.injury.2015.02.010
• 44 Wegmann K, Engel K, Skouras E. et al. Reconstruction of Monteggia-like proximal ulna fractures using different fixation devices: a biomechanical study. Injury 2016; 47: 1636-1641 doi:10.1016/j.injury.2016.05.010
• 45 Hackl M, Mayer K, Weber M. et al. Plate osteosynthesis of proximal ulna fractures-a biomechanical micromotion analysis. J Hand Surg Am 2017; 42: 834.e1-834.e7 doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2017.05.014
• 46 Wellman DS, Tucker SM, Baxter JR. et al. Comminuted olecranon fractures: biomechanical testing of locked versus minifragment non-locked plate fixation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137: 1173-1179 doi:10.1007/s00402-017-2735-6
• 47 Dey Hazra RO, Lill H, Jensen G. et al. Fracture-pattern-related therapy concepts in distal humeral fractures. Obere Extrem 2018; 13: 23-32 doi:10.1007/s11678-018-0442-8
• 48 Schmidt-Horlohé KH, Bonk A, Wilde P. et al. Promising results after the treatment of simple and complex distal humerus type C fractures by angular-stable double-plate osteosynthesis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2013; 99: 531-541 doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2013.02.004