Comparison of Locked Plates and Blade Plates for Varus Osteotomy of the Proximal Femur by the Finite Element Method

Abstract

Objective: The present study compared the difference in load and pressure distribution behavior of the blade plate and locked plate for varus osteotomy of the proximal femur per the finite element method.

Methods: Modeling was performed by scanning a medium-sized left femur with medial valgus deformity made of polyurethane.

Results: The stiffness of the locked plate is higher compared with that of the blade plate. However, this difference was not significant. In addition, the locked plate has proximal locking screws to ensure that the bending moments on the screws are smaller during loading.

Conclusion: In summary, both plates are well-established and effective. However, the study using the finite element method plays a fundamental role in understanding the load and pressure distribution of the implant. Moreover, it opens up new possibilities for further studies, including surgical proposals and customized implant materials.

Keywords

orthopedics - traumatology - femur - bone plates

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 28. November 2022

Angenommen: 24. Januar 2023

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
21. März 2024

• Referências

• 1 Joeris A, Audigé L, Ziebarth K, Slongo T. The Locking Compression Paediatric Hip Plate: technical guide and critical analysis. Int Orthop 2012; 36 (11) 2299-2306
• 2 Ruzbarsky JJ, Swarup I, Garner MR, Meyers KN, Edobor-Osula F, Widmann RF. et al. Biomechanical Comparison of Two Pediatric Blade Plate Designs in Proximal Femoral Osteotomies. HSS J 2020; 16 (01) 81-85
• 3 Jain A, Thompson JM, Brooks JT, Ain MC, Sponseller PD. Implant-related Fractures in Children With Proximal Femoral Osteotomy: Blade Plate Versus Screw-side Plate Constructs. J Pediatr Orthop 2016; 36 (01) e1-e5
• 4 Crist BD, Khalafi A, Hazelwood SJ, Lee MA. A biomechanical comparison of locked plate fixation with percutaneous insertion capability versus the angled blade plate in a subtrochanteric fracture gap model. J Orthop Trauma 2009; 23 (09) 622-627
• 5 Soni JF, Santili C, Lancellotti CLP, Hecke MB, Almeida FR, Karam LZ. Análise comparativa em modelo computadorizado bidimensional com simulação do emprego de hastes flexíveis de aço e titânio na fratura do fêmur da criança utilizando o método dos elementos finitos. Rev Bras Ortop 2008; 43 (05) 183-192
• 6 Nag P, Chanda S. Biomechanical design prognosis of two extramedullary fixation devices for subtrochanteric femur fracture: a finite element study. Med Biol Eng Comput 2021; 59 (02) 271-285
• 7 Maurer P, Holweg S, Schubert J. Finite-element-analysis of different screw-diameters in the sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1999; 27 (06) 365-372
• 8 Janeček M, Novy F, Harcuba P, Stráský J, Trško L, Mhaede M. et al. The Very High Cycle Fatigue Behaviour of Ti-6Al-4V Alloy. Acta Phys Pol A 2015; 128: 497-503
• 9 Marco M, Giner E, Larraínzar R, Caeiro J, Miguélez H. Analysis of the variation of the mechanical behavior of the proximal extremity of the femur using the XFEM method (eXtended Finite Element Method). J Osteoporos Min Metabol 2016; 8: 61-69
• 10 Perry J. Gait Analysis: Normal and Pathological Function. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK, Inc.; 1992: 11-12
• 11 Wang J, Ma JX, Lu B, Bai HH, Wang Y, Ma XL. Comparative finite element analysis of three implants fixing stable and unstable subtrochanteric femoral fractures: Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA), Proximal Femoral Locking Plate (PFLP), and Reverse Less Invasive Stabilization System (LISS). Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2020; 106 (01) 95-101
• 12 Taddei F, Viceconti M, Manfrini M, Toni A. Mechanical strength of a femoral reconstruction in paediatric oncology: a finite element study. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2003; 217 (02) 111-119
• 13 Kainz H, Killen BA, Wesseling M, Perez-Boerema F, Pitto L, Aznar JMG. et al. A multi-scale modelling framework combining musculoskeletal rigid-body simulations with adaptive finite element analyses, to evaluate the impact of femoral geometry on hip joint contact forces and femoral bone growth. PLoS One 2020; 15 (07) e0235966
• 14 Lewis GS, Mischler D, Wee H, Reid JS, Varga P. Finite Element Analysis of Fracture Fixation. Curr Osteoporos Rep 2021; 19 (04) 403-416
• 15 Zhang QY, Zhou Y, Li XX, Wang L, Cui XH, Wang SQ. Accelerated Formation of Tribo-oxide Layer and Its Effect on Sliding Wear of a Titanium Alloy. Tribol Lett 2016; 63 (01)
• 16 Adamus J, Lacki P, Motyka M. Kubiak KInvestigation of sheet-titanium drawability. In: Ti 2011 Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Titanium, Bei- jing, China, june 19 to ] une 24, 2011: 337-341
• 17 Eberle S, Gerber C, von Oldenburg G, Hungerer S, Augat P. Type of hip fracture determines load share in intramedullary osteosynthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467 (08) 1972-1980
• 18 Faria FF, Gruhl CEM, Ferro RR, Rached RN, Soni JF, Trevilatto P. Finite Element Analysis of a Controlled Dynamization Device for External Circular Fixation. Rev Bras Ortop 2021; 56 (01) 36-41
• 19 Radtke K, Goede F, Schwarze M, Paes P, Ettinger M, Welke B. Fixation stability and stiffness of two implant systems for proximal femoral varization osteotomy. Appl Sci (Basel) 2020;•••;. Doi: 10.5867.10.3390/app10175867
• 20 Forward DP, Doro CJ, OʼToole RV, Kim H, Floyd JCP, Sciadini MF. et al. A biomechanical comparison of a locking plate, a nail, and a 95° angled blade plate for fixation of subtrochanteric femoral fractures. J Orthop Trauma 2012; 26 (06) 334-340
• 21 Sim E, Freimüller W, Reiter TJ. Finite element analysis of the stress distributions in the proximal end of the femur after stabilization of a pertrochanteric model fracture: a comparison of two implants. Injury 1995; 26 (07) 445-449
• 22 Wolff J. Das Gesetz der Transformation der Knochen. Berlin: Hirschwald; 1892
• 23 Perren S, Boitzy A. Cellular differentiation and bone biomechanics during the consolidation of a fracture. Clin Anat 1978; 1: 13-28
• 24 Glatt V, Matthys R. Adjustable stiffness, external fixator for the rat femur osteotomy and segmental bone defect models. J Vis Exp 2014; 9 (92) e51558
• 25 Zienkiewicz OC. The finite element method. 3rd expanded and rev. ed.. London; New York: McGraw-Hill; ; c 1977