Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21(05): 418-426
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-07-09-0089
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Biomechanical comparison of the pullout properties of external skeletal fixation pins in the tibiae of intact and ovariectomised ewes

B. J. Keeley
1   UCD School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
,
B. Heidari
2   UCD School of Electrical, Electronic and Mechanical Engineering, Engineering and Material Sciences Centre, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
,
N. J. Mahony
3   Trinity Centre for Bioengineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Trinity College, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
,
S. M. Rackard
1   UCD School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
,
F. J. O’Brien
4   Department of Anatomy, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
,
T. C. Lee
3   Trinity Centre for Bioengineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Trinity College, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
,
O. Brennan
4   Department of Anatomy, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
,
O. D. Kennedy
4   Department of Anatomy, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
,
D. FitzPatrick
2   UCD School of Electrical, Electronic and Mechanical Engineering, Engineering and Material Sciences Centre, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 17 September 2007

Accepted 04 February 2008

Publication Date:
21 December 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

The pin-bone interface is the least stable component of the external skeletal fixator. Concerns exist regarding the ability to obtain adequate implant purchase in poor quality bone. Consequently, reduced bone quality has been viewed as a contra-indication for the use of external skeletal fixators. The aim of this study was to investigate the holding power of two different fixator pin designs in bone from entire and ovariectomised sheep. Thirty-two aged ewes were divided into two groups. Group 1 were controls, and Group 2 were ovariectomised (OVX). The ewes were sacrificed 12 months postovariectomy and five pairs of tibiae were harvested from each group. The holding power of cortical and cancellous fixator pins was assessed at five standardised locations on each tibia. An increase in mean cortical thickness was noted in the OVX group. The holding power of cancellous fixator pins was superior to that of cortical pins, irrespective of whether or not ovariectomy had been performed. Cancellous pins had an increased holding power in post ovariectomy bone compared to control bone. Cortical pin performance was not affected by ovariectomy. There was a lack of correlation between the incidence of insertional fractures of the far cortex and implant holding power. The results raise questions over the effectiveness of ovariectomy in establishing osteopaenic bone suitable for assessing implant performance, hence further investigations are warranted.

Keywords

Implant - holding power - mechanical properties - cortical - cancellous
 

  • References

  • 1 Chao EY, Pope M. The mechanical basis of external fixation. In: Concepts in External Fixation. Seglison D, Pope M (eds). Orlando, FL: Grune & Stratton 1982; 13-39.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 McDonald DE, Palmar RH, Hulse DA. et al. Holding power of threaded external skeletal fixation pins in the near and far cortices of cadaveric canine tibiae. Vet Surg 1994; 23: 488-493.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Bechtol CD, Ferguson AB, Laing PG. Metals and Engineering in Bone and Joint Surgery. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1959; 152-165.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Egger EL, Histand MB, Blass CE. et al. Effect of fixation pin insertion on the bone-pin interface. Vet Surg 1986; 15: 246-252.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Bennett RA, Egger EL, Histand M. et al. Comparison of the strength and holding power of 4 pin designs for use with half pin (type I) external skeletal fixation. Vet Surg 1987; 16: 207-211.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 DeCoster TA, Heetderks DB, Downey DJ. et al. Optimising bone screw pullout force. J Orthop Trauma 1990; 4: 169-174.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Halsey D, Fleming B, Pope MH. et al. External fixator pin design. Clin Orthop 1992; 278: 305-312.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Halverson TL, Kelley LA, Thomas KA. et al. Effects of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation. Spine 1994; 19: 2415-2420
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Wittenberg RH, Shea M, Swartz DE. et al. Importance of bone mineral density in instrumented spine fusions. Spine 1991; 16: 647-652.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 McLain RF, McKinley TO, Yerby SA. et al. The effect of bone quality on pedicle screw loading in axial instability. A synthetic model. Spine 1997; 22: 1454-1460.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ansell RH, Scales JT. A study of some factors which affect the strength of screws and their insertion and holding power in bone. J Biomech 1968; 1: 279-302.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Nunamaker DM, Perren SM. Force measurements in screw fixation. J Biomech 1976; 9: 669-675.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Uhl RL. The biomechanics of screws. Orthop Rev 1989; 18: 1302-1307.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Pennig D. The place of unilateral external skeletal fixation in the treatment of tibial fractures. Int Orthop Trauma 1991; 1: 161-176.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Moroni A, Faldini C, Marchetti S. et al. Improvement of the bone-pin interface strength in osteoporotic bone with use of hydroxyapatite-coated tapered external-fixation pins. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001; 83: 717-721.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Moroni A, Faldini C, Pegreffi F. et al. Osteoporotic pertrochanteric fractures can be successfully treated with external fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87: 42-50.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Mori H, Manabe M, Kurachi Y. et al. Osseointegration of dental implants in rabbit bone with low mineral density. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997; 55: 351-361.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Pan J, Shirota T, Ohno K. et al. Effect of ovariectomy on bone remodelling adjacent to hydroxyapatite-coated implants in the tibia of mature rats. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000; 58: 877-882.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Rocca M, Fini M, Giavaresi G. et al. Tibial implants: biomechanical and histomorphometric studies of stainless steel and titanium screws hydroxyapatite-coated and uncoated in long-term ovariectomised sheep. Int J Artif Oragns 2001; 24: 649-654.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Egermann M, Goldhahn J, Schneider E. Animal models for treatment in osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2005; 16: S129-S138.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Newman E, Turner AS, Wark JD. The potential of sheep for the study of osteopania: current status and comparison with other animal models. Bone 1995; 16: 277S-84S.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Hornby SB, Ford SL, Mase CA. et al. Skeletal changes in the ovariectomised ewe and subsequent response to treatment with 17 beta oestradiol. Bone 1995; 17 (Suppl.): 389S-394S.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Turner AS, Alvis M, Myers W. et al. Changes in bone mineral density and bone-specific alkaline phosphate in ovariectomised ewes. Bone 1995; 17 (Suppl. 01) 395S-402S.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Turner AS, Mallinckrodt CH, Alvis MR, Bryant HU. Dose-response effects of estradiol implants on bone mineral density in ovariectomised ewes. Bone 1995; 17 (Suppl. 04) 421S-427S
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Johnson RB, Gilbert JA, Cooper RC. et al. Effect of estrogen deficiency on skeletal and alveolar bone density in sheep. J Periodontol 2002; 73: 383-391.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Chavassieux P, Garnero P, Duboeuf F. et al. Effects of a new selective oestrogen receptor modulator (MDL 103, 323) on cancellous and cortical bone in ovariectomised ewes: a biomechanical, histomorphometric, and densitometric study. J Bone Miner Res 2001; 16: 89-96.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Geusens P, Boonen S. Nijs Je tal. Effect of salmon calcitonin on femoral bone quality in adult ovariectomised ewes. Calcif Tissue Int 1996; 59: 315-320.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Kennedy OD. The effect of bone turnover on bone quality and material properties.. [PhD thesis] Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland 2007 .
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Fini M, Pierini G, Giavaresi G. et al. The ovariectomised sheep as a model for testing biomaterials and prosthetic devices in osteoporotic bone: apreliminary study on iliac crest biopsies. Int J Artif Organs 2000; 23: 275-281.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Brennan O. The effect of osteoporosis on bone quantity, quality and strength.. [PhD thesis] Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland 2007; Chapter 3 61-87.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kelleher D, Kennedy OD, Rackard SM. et al. Investigation into the effect of osteoporosis on trabecular bone: bone quality assessment of cored vertebral samples.. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the Section of Bioengineering of the Royal Academy of Medicine in Ireland, (eds) McHugh P, O’Mahoney D, Fitzpatrick D. Galway, Ireland, 27-28 January 2006; p80.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Reed MR, Ali AM, Yang L. et al. The biomechanical effects of freezing and thawing cancellous bone. J Bone Joint Surg 2000; 82B (Suppl. 02) 128.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Anderson MA, Mann FA, Kinden DA. et al. Evaluation of cortical bone damage and axial holding power of non-threaded and enhanced threaded pins placed with and without drilling of a pilot hole in femurs from canine cadavers. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1996; 208: 883-887.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Ling RSM. Observations on the fixation of implants to the bony skeleton. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1986; 210: 80-96.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Vangsness CT, Carter DR, Frankel VH. In vitro evaluation of the loosening characteristics of self tapped and nonself tapped cortical bone screws. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1981; 157: 279-286.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Schatzker J, Sanderson R, Murnaghan JP. The holding power of orthopaedic screws in vivo. Clin Orthop 1970; 108: 115-126.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Ferrara LA, Ryken TC. Screw pullout testing. In: Mechanical Testing of Bone and the Bone-Implant Interface. An YH, Draughn RA (eds). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2000: 551-565.
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Bynum D, Ledbetter WB, Boyd CL. et al. Holding characteristics of fasteners in bone. Expl Mech 1970; 10: 474-480.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Koranyi E, Bowman CE, Knecht CD. et al. Holding power of orthopaedic screws in bone. Clin Orthop 1972; 72: 283-286.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Schatzker J. Concepts of fracture stabilisation.. In: Bone in Clinical Orthopaedics. Sumner-Smith G. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1982: 387-398.
    Google Scholar
  • 41 Johnson NL, Galuppo LD, Stover SM. et al. An in vitro biomechanical comparison of the insertion variables and pullout mechanical properties of AO 6.5 mm standard cancellous and 7.3mm self-tapping, cannulated bone screws in foal femoral bone. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 681-690.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Seebeck J, Morlock Goldhahn MM. et al. Mechanical behaviour of screws innormal and osteoporotic bone. Osteoporos Int2005 16: S107-S111.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Marti JM, Roe SC. An in vitro comparison of hollow ground and trocar points on threaded positive profile external skeletal fixation pins in canine cadaveric bone. Vet Surg 1999; 28: 279-286.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Griffin H. IMEX™ Veterinary, Inc. 2006 product catalog p38 and personnel communication.
    PubMed
  • 45 Bouxsein ML, Courtney AC, Hayes WC. Ultrasound and densitometry of the calcaneus correlate with the failure loads of cadaveric femurs. Calcif Tissue Int 1995; 56: 99-103.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Bouxsein G. Bone quality: where do we go from here?. Osteoporos Int 2003; 14 (Suppl. 05) 118-127.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Seebeck J, Goldhahn J, Stadele H. et al. Effect of cortical thickness and cancellous bone density on the holding strength of internal fixator screws. J Orthop Res 2004; 22: 1237-1242.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 McNamara LM, Prendergast PJ, Lyons CG. et al. Strength of single rat trabeculae in normal, ovariectomised, and drug treated rat bone during aging. Trans. 48th Orthopaedic Research Society meeting 2003; 35 .
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Bouxsein ML. Determinants of skeletal fragility. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2005; 19: 897-911.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Arens D, Sigrist I, Alini M. et al. Seasonal changes in bone metabolism in sheep. Vet J 2007; 174: 585-591.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Campbell AW, Bain WE, McRae AF. et al. Bone density in sheep: genetic variation and quantitative trait loci localisation. Bone 2003; 33: 540-548.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Martin RB, Burr DB. A hypothetical mechanism for the stimulation of ostenal remodelling by fatigue damage. J Biomech 1982; 15: 137-139.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Sigrist IM, Gerhardt C, Alini M. et al. The longterm effects of ovariectomy on bone metabolism in sheep. J Bone Miner Metab 2007; 25: 28-35.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar