Mechanical behavior of fixation components for periprosthetic fracture surgery

Treatment of Periprosthetic Hip Fractures Vancouver B1 and C: The Significance of Bicortical Fixation. A Bicentric Study Comparing Two Osteosynthesis Systems

INTRODUCTION The incidence of periprosthetic fractures (PFFs) is estimated to range from 0.1% to 4.1%1, due to the increasing prevalence of joint arthroplasties, coupled with an aging population. Numerous risk factors, including advanced age (>80 years), female gender, implant type, prior diagnoses of osteonecrosis and rheumatoid arthritis, revision surgery, aseptic stem mobilization, and the use of non-cemented stems, have been identified. Survivors of periprosthetic fractures often experience functional deterioration, facing a fourfold higher risk of hospitalization for postoperative complications compared to patients undergoing primary implantation, especially in the first postoperative year. MATERIALS AND METHODS Between 2018 and 2022, at the Maggiore Hospitals in Bologna and the San Matteo Policlinic in Pavia, we performed osteosynthesis on 84 patients with periprosthetic fractures of Vancouver type B1 or C. In 38 patients, we employed angular stable plates with the Zimmer Biomet NCB-PP® system. In 46 patients, we utilized INTRAUMA plates: DF distal femur and PFF proximal. Relevant postoperative follow-up outcomes considered included reintervention, infectious complications, radiographic healing, and functional recovery, with reference to changes in the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and the Harris Hip Score (HHS). All patients underwent clinical and radiographic evaluations during the follow-up period, averaging 28 months (range: 12-48 months), with a minimum follow-up duration of 12 months. RESULTS At the 4-month postoperative assessment, 71% of patients maintained their preoperative functional level, 19% experienced a 1-point GOS scale drop, and 10% died (GOS 5). The average HHS at 4 months was 80.2 points (range: 65-90). At the 6-month follow-up, 98.2% of patients achieved complete healing on radiographic examination. Only 1 patient (1.2%) developed a pseudoarthrosis site with synthesis device rupture. Only 1 patient (1.2%) required additional surgical treatment 2 years later due to the development of un aseptic perisynthetic fluid collection, while the remaining 5 patients (6%) who developed complications benefited from conservative treatment: 4 patients (3.6%) with infectious complications were treated with intravenous antibiotics. In the 2 patients (2.3%) with mobilization or rupture of synthesis devices, clinical and radiographic monitoring was opted for. 8 patients (10.7%) died: one 48 hours after the surgery, and the other 7 more than one month after the surgery. CONCLUSION Our clinical findings align with to existing scientific literature on periprosthetic fractures (B1 and C according to Vancouver classification). Moreover, good stability has been guaranteed at the radiological follow up by Zimmer Biomet NCB-PP® and INTRAUMA DF distal femur and PFF proximal plates. The locking construct allows for improved stability especially in osteoporotic bone.

[Concept for the treatment of periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures]

Due to demographic changes and increased survival rates of total hip arthroplasties, the incidence of periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures is increasing. The current treatment concept requires accurate preoperative planning. Besides patient-related risk factors, fracture type, prosthesis stability, and bone quality influence whether osteosynthesis or a revision arthroplasty is required.

Comparison of five methods for locked-plate fixation of complex diaphyseal fractures

BACKGROUND

Peri-prosthetic fractures (PPFs) are steadily rising in number due to population ageing and increased performance of joint replacement procedures. Although PPFs without implant loosening are usually managed by internal fixation, no consensus exists regarding the optimal construct. The primary objective of this study was to compare five constructs, and the secondary objective was to compare sub-groups of mono-cortical screw constructs, with the goal of identifying the method most appropriate for diaphyseal fracture fixation when prosthetic material is present within the intra-medullary canal.

HYPOTHESIS

The primary hypothesis was that fixation using bi-cortical screws, i.e., the current reference standard, was superior over other fixation methods. The secondary hypothesis was that adding double cerclage to mono-cortical screw fixation provided the greatest mechanical strength.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Synthetic osteoporotic bone was used to compare five methods for locking-screw fixation of a femoral diaphyseal plate. One method involved bi-cortical screws and four methods mono-cortical screws, with no cerclage wire, a single cerclage wire on either side positioned near or at a distance from the fracture, and two cerclage wires on both sides of the fracture. A complex fracture was simulated by creating a 2-cm diaphyseal gap. Load-to-failure was determined by applying compression loading along the anatomical axis of the femur.

RESULTS

Bi-cortical screw fixation provided greater mechanical strength than did three of the four mono-cortical screw constructs. The exception was the mono-cortical-screw and double-cerclage construct, for which no significant difference was found compared to bi-cortical screw fixation. Thus, mono-cortical screw fixation with double cerclage may be the best alternative when presence of an implant in the intra-medullary canal precludes bi-cortical screw fixation.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study have clear implications for clinical practice. The study hypotheses were partly confirmed. The absence of a significant difference between the reference-standard bi-cortical screw fixation method and mono-cortical screw fixation with double cerclage, combined with the results regarding the secondary objective, suggest that mono-cortical screws plus double cerclage deserve preference in patients with an intra-medullary implant. Clinical studies are needed to assess the results of this bench study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, bench study.

Metal and composite bone plates for B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture in healthy and osteoporotic condition: A comparative biomechanical study

The major concern after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the incidence of periprosthetic fracture in the weaker bone, which can lead to subsequent revision surgery. Achieving the suitable fixation without affecting the stability of the well-fixed prosthesis remains controversial. Most of the studies examined the behavior of the Periprosthetic Fracture (PF) fixation (Vancouver “B1” type) through computational and experimentation on healthy bone condition with metal plates. The aim of the present study is to analyze the influences of the metal and composite bone plate PF fixation on the axial and shear movement at the fracture site. The PF fixation constructs were modeled with medical graded stainless-steel plate (construct A), titanium plate (construct B) and carbon/epoxy composite bone plate (construct C) with 12 holes and a 4 mm fracture gap. Analysis was carried out for all the stages (stage 1—Normal bone, stage 2—THA, stage 3—Immediate Post-Operative (IPO), stage 4—Post-Operative (PO) and, stage 5—Healed Bone (HB)) under various loadings for intact and osteoporosis conditions. The results showed higher stress in cortical bone for stage 3, whereas in all the other stages lower stresses were experienced in the cortical and cancelous bone under peak load in construct C for osteoporosis model compared with other constructs. The present study suggested the construct C may be suitable for osteoporosis bone conditions.

Femoral periprosthetic fracture treatment using the Ortho-Bridge System: a biomechanical study

BACKGROUND

We undertook a comparative biomechanical study of type B1 fractures around femoral prostheses following cemented hip arthroplasty using the Ortho-Bridge System (OBS) and a locking compression plate/locking attachment plate structure (LCP + LAP). We aimed to investigate the biomechanical characteristics and advantages of the OBS compared with LCP + LAP when treating this fracture type.

METHODS

An OBS fixation model was designed based on OBS and LCP + LAP fixation characteristics. The LCP + LAP combination (Group A) and three different OBS combinations (Groups B, C, and D) were used to fix a B1 fracture model with a femoral periprosthetic fracture. Axial compression and torsion experiments were then performed using simple and comminuted fracture models. The axial compression failure experiment was carried out, and the model stiffness during axial compression, torsion angle in torsion test, and vertical load in the final failure test were collected.

RESULTS

When simulating simple oblique fractures, no significant difference was found among the four groups in terms of stiffness in the axial compression experiment (P = 0.257). The torsion angle of the LCP + LAP system was significantly higher compared with the OBS system (P < 0.05). When simulating a comminuted fracture, the experimental data for axial compression showed that the rigidity measurements of the three combinations of the OBS system were higher compared with the LCP + LAP system (P = 0.000) and that the torsion angles of three combinations of the OBS system were smaller compared with the LCP + LAP system (P < 0.05). In the axial compression failure test, the fixed failure mode of the LCP + LAP system was the destruction of the contact cortex at the fracture site, whereas the failure modes in the three OBS combinations involved fracture around the screws above the osteotomy and destruction of the contact cortex at the fracture site.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings revealed that the OBS produced superior biomechanical outcomes compared with LCP + LAP, especially for the bridging two-rod dual cortex. According to the performance observed after model axial compression destruction, the OBS was fixed and provided greater stress dispersion, which might make it more suitable for facilitating early functional movement and avoiding the failure of internal fixation.

LOQTEQ® VA Periprosthetic Plate-A New Concept for Bicortical Screw Fixation in Periprosthetic Fractures: A Technical Note

Internal fixation using angle stable plates is the treatment standard in periprosthetic fractures around stable implants. To provide instant postoperative full weight-bearing, bicortical screw fixation is advisable but often surgically demanding. This work presents the first clinical results of the LOQTEQ^® VA Periprosthetic Plate (aap Implantate AG, Berlin, Germany), a new plate system to simplify screw placement around implants. This plate system uses insertable hinges that allow for variable angle screw anchorage. Data of 26 patients with a mean age of 80 years and a mean follow-up of 13.9 months were retrospectively collected. Patients were clinically and radiologically examined. Bony union was achieved in 14 out of 15 patients with no signs of non-union or implant loosening. One patient, however, presented with implant failure. Clinical scores demonstrated acceptable results. Since the hinge plates are easy to apply, the first results are promising.

A New System for Periprosthetic Fracture Stabilization-A Biomechanical Comparison

In recent years, an increase in periprosthetic femur fractures has become apparent due to the increased number of hip replacements. In the case of Vancouver type B1 fractures, locking plate systems offer safe procedures. This study compared the distal lateral femur plate (LOQTEQ^®, aap Implantate AG) with a standard L.I.S.S. LCP^® (DePuy Synthes) regarding their biomechanical properties in fixation of periprosthetic femur fractures after hip arthroplasty. We hypothesized that the new LOQTEQ system has superior stability and durability in comparison. Eighteen artificial left femurs were randomized in two groups (Group A: LOQTEQ^®; Group B: L.I.S.S. LCP^®) and tested until failure. Failure was defined as 10° varus deformity and catastrophic implant failure (loosening, breakage, progressive bending). Axial stiffness, loads of failure, cycles of failure, modes of failure were recorded. The axial stiffness in Group A with 73.4 N/mm (SD +/− 3.0) was significantly higher (p = 0.001) than in Group B (40.7 N/mm (SD +/− 2.8)). Group A resists more cycles than Group B until 10° varus deformity. Catastrophic failure mode was plate breakage in Group A and bending in Group B. In conclusion, LOQTEQ^® provides higher primary stability and tends to have higher durability.

Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems

Introduction

Periprosthetic fractures of the femur are an increasing problem in today's trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Owing to the hip stem, implant anchorage is very difficult in the proximal femur. This study compares two plate systems regarding their biomechanical properties and the handling in periprosthetic fracture fixation of the proximal femur.

Materials and methods

Using eight pairs of fresh, frozen human proximal femora the Locking Compression Plate/Locking Attachment Plate construct (LCP/LAP) (group I, DePuy Synthes) was compared to the new LOQTEQ® periprosthetic distal lateral femur plate (group II, AAP Implantate AG). After implantation of press fit femoral hip stems a Vancouver B1 fracture model was used. Biomechanical testing was performed by cyclic axial loading with a constant increment of 0.1 N/cycle starting from 750 N axial loading. Every 250 cycles an a.p. x-ray was done to evaluate failure.

Results

The Group II showed significant higher axial stiffness (+42%) compared with Group I. In addition, Group II withstood significantly more load-cycles until failure (20%). The mode of catastrophic failure was plate breakage in Group II, whereas, in Group I, all plates showed an early bending followed by plate breakage.

Discussion and conclusion

Both plate systems enable screw placement around hip stems. The hinge plate showed superior biomechanical results compared with the locking compression plate/locking attachment plate construct. Furthermore, the hinge plate offers variable hinges and variable angel locking making bicortical screw placement around hip stems more comfortable and safe.

The translational potential of this article

The results of this study can be directly transferred to patient care. With the innovative hinge plate, the surgeon has a biomechanically superior implant, which also offers improved options for screw placement compared to a standard locking plate.

Periprosthetic fracture fixation of the femur following total hip arthroplasty: A review of biomechanical testing - Part II

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic femoral fracture is a severe complication of total hip arthroplasty. A previous review published in 2011 summarised the biomechanical studies regarding periprosthetic femoral fracture and its fixation techniques. Since then, there have been several commercially available fracture plates designed specifically for the treatment of these fractures. However, several clinical studies still report failure of fixation treatments used for these fractures.

METHODS

The current literature on biomechanical models of periprosthetic femoral fracture fixation since 2010 to present is reviewed. The methodologies involved in the experimental and computational studies of periprosthetic femoral fracture fixation are described and compared with particular focus on the recent developments.

FINDINGS

Several issues raised in the previous review paper have been addressed by current studies; such as validating computational results with experimental data. Current experimental studies are more sophisticated in design. Computational studies have been useful in studying fixation methods or conditions (such as bone healing) that are difficult to study in vivo or in vitro. However, a few issues still remain and are highlighted.

INTERPRETATION

The increased use of computational studies in investigating periprosthetic femoral fracture fixation techniques has proven valuable. Existing protocols for testing periprosthetic femoral fracture fixation need to be standardised in order to make more direct and conclusive comparisons between studies. A consensus on the 'optimum' treatment method for periprosthetic femoral fracture fixation needs to be achieved.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Osteoporotic Proximal Periprosthetic Femur Fractures With Proximal Bicortical Fixation and Allograft Struts

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the strength of proximal bicortical fixation using a novel osteoporotic synthetic bone model of Vancouver B1 periprosthetic proximal periprosthetic femur fractures (PFFs) and to assess the influence of strut allograft augmentation with regard to allowing early assisted weight bearing. The secondary aim was to evaluate whether the strut position, either medial or anterior, influenced the strength of the construct.

METHODS

Thirty synthetic osteoporotic femurs were implanted with cemented stems. A segmental defect made distal to the stem simulated a fracture and was repaired with a stainless steel locking compression plate and 2 stainless steel proximal locking attachment plates. Specimens were then divided into 3 groups: no-strut, medial strut, and anterior strut. Cadaveric femoral struts were wired to the specimens. Cyclic axial compression simulated assisted weight bearing and was followed by loading to failure.

RESULTS

Medial struts required higher failure load than no-strut (P = 0.008) and more energy to failure than anterior (P = 0.018) or no-strut (P < 0.001). The higher load to failure, however, would not be advantageous in clinical practice because estimates for assisted weight bearing after fractures in average-weight patients are well below these failure loads. Furthermore, all specimens tolerated cyclical loading. All failures occurred distal to the plate originating at the last screw hole.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure loads for all groups were above what would be expected for low-demand activities of assisted weight bearing. Therefore, proximal bicortical fixation should allow for early, assisted weight bearing without allograft strut augmentation even with lower density bone.

Why and how do locking plates fail?

Locking plates have led to important changes in bone fracture management, allowing flexible biological fracture fixation based on the principle of an internal fixator. The technique has its indications and limitations. Most of the typical failure patterns arise from basic technical errors. Types of locking plates, material properties and the general principles of locking plate applications are reviewed together with their misapplication.

Pullout strength of monocortical and bicortical screws in meta -physeal and diaphyseal regions of the canine humerus

Objective: Monocortical screws are commonly employed in locking plate fixation, but specific recommendations for their placement are lacking and use of short monocortical screws in metaphyseal bone may be contra indicated. Objectives of this study were to evaluate axial pullout strength of two different lengths of monocortical screws placed in various regions of the canine humerus compared to bicortical screws, and to derive cortical thickness and bone density values for those regions using quantitative computed tomography analysis (QCT).

Methods: The QCT analysis was performed on 36 cadaveric canine humeri for six regions of interest (ROI). A bicortical, short monocortical, or 50% transcortical 3.5 mm screw was implanted in each ROI and axial pullout testing was performed.

Results: Bicortical screws were stronger than monocortical screws in all ROI except the lateral epicondylar crest. Short monocortical metaphyseal screws were weaker than those placed in other regions. The 50% transcortical screws were stronger than the short monocortical screws in the condyle. A linear relationship between screw length and pull-out strength was observed.

Clinical significance: Cortical thickness and bone density measurements were obtained from multiple regions of the canine humerus using QCT. Use of short monocortical screws may contribute to failure of locking plate fixation of humeral fractures, especially when placed in the condyle. When bicortical screw placement is not possible, maximizing monocortical screw length may optimize fixation stability for distal humeral fractures.

Interprosthetic and Peri-Implant Fractures: Principles of Operative Fixation and Future Directions

Advances in medicine and orthopaedic implant technology have dramatically increased the number of patients sustaining interprosthetic, inter-, or peri-implant fractures. For these complex clinical scenarios, there are currently no available treatment algorithms. In this review, we outline the principles, strategies, and techniques to obtain both successful reconstruction and maximum function.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Double plating in Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic proximal femur fractures: A biomechanical study

Periprosthetic hip fractures are an increasing problem in modern orthopedic and trauma surgery. Many options for the operative treatment are available to the surgeon ranging from modern variable angular systems to standard plates, screws, and cerclages. However, there is no gold standard and therefore, the aim of this study, was to investigate the biomechanical characteristics of double plating versus a lateral standard plate in a Vancouver B1 fracture model. Ten 4th generation composite femora were used to implant cementless total hip prosthesis and create Vancouver B1 periprosthetic fractures. Afterwards, the osteotomies were fixed using the locking compression plate in combination with the locking attachment plate (LCP, LAP, DePuy Synthes, Solothurn, Switzerland)-group I. Group II additionally achieved a 5-hole 4.5/5.0 mm LCP anteriorly. Each construct was cyclically loaded to failure in axial compression. Axial construct stiffness was 50.87 N/mm (SD 1.61) for group I compared to 738.68 N/mm (SD 94.8) for group II, this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.016). The number of cycles to failure was also significant higher for group II (2,375 vs. 13,000 cycles; p = 0.016). Double plating can significantly increase construct stiffness and stability, and thus, is an option in the treatment of complex periprosthetic fractures, in revision surgery and for patients with the inability to partial weight bear. © 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:234-239, 2017.

Periprosthetic fracture fixation in osteoporotic bone

Fixation techniques of periprosthetic fractures are far from ideal although the number of this entity is rising. The presence of an intramedullary implant generates its own fracture characteristics since stiffness is altered along the bone shaft and certain implant combinations affect load resistance of the bone. Influencing factors are cement fixation of the implant, intramedullary locking and extramedullary or intramedullary localization of the implant and the cortical thickness of the surrounding bone. Cerclage wires are ideally suited to fix radially displaced fragments around an intramedullary implant but they are susceptible to axial and torsional load. Screws should be added if these forces have to be neutralized. Stability of the screw fixation itself can be enhanced by embracement configuration around the intramedullary implant. Poor bone stock quality, often being present in metaphyseal areas limits screw fixation. Cement augmentation is an attractive option in this field to enhance screw purchase.

Enhancing fixation strength in periprosthetic femur fractures by orthogonal plating-A biomechanical study

Orthogonal plate osteosynthesis enhances fixation stability in periprosthetic femur fractures. Another option are locking attachment plates (LAP) allowing bicortical locking screw placement lateral to the prosthesis stem. Stability of lateral plate osteosynthesis with two LAP (2LAP) was compared to anterolateral orthogonal plate osteosynthesis (OP) with one LAP in a periprosthetic femur fracture model. In six pairs of fresh frozen human femora with cemented Charnley hip prosthesis, a transverse osteotomy was set distal to the tip of the prosthesis simulating a Vancouver type B1 fracture. Each pair was instrumented using a plate tensioner with either one lateral plate and two LAP, or two orthogonal anterolateral plates and one LAP. Stiffness was determined in a four-point-bending test prior to cyclic testing (2Hz) with physiologic profile and progressively increasing load up to catastrophic construct failure. Paired t-test and Wilcoxon-signed-rank test were used for statistical evaluation at a level of significance p = 0.05. The OP construct exhibited a significantly higher number of cycles and load to failure (39,627 cycles ± 4,056; 4,463 N ± 906) compared to the 2LAP construct (32,927 cycles ± 3,487; 3,793 N ± 849), p < 0.01. Mediolateral bending and torsional stiffness of the OP (1610 N/mm ± 249; 16.9 Nm/mm ± 6.3) were significantly higher compared to 2 LAP (1077 N/mm ± 189; 12.1 Nm/mm ± 3.9), p = 0.03 for both comparisons. Orthogonal plate osteosynthesis is a valuable option in periprosthetic fracture surgery, offering increased stability compared to a single lateral plate fixed with two LAP.

Biomechanical evaluation of periprosthetic refractures following distal femur locking plate fixation

INTRODUCTION

Distal femur fractures proximal to total knee femoral component constitutes the most prevalent type of periprosthetic fracture, and plate fixation treatment is associated with a 7.7% incidence of refracture proximal to the plate. The primary objective of this study was to compare proximal fixation techniques of a periprosthetic distal femur fracture plate in an osteoporotic bone model. The secondary objective was to determine the subsequent periprosthetic plate fracture pattern and/or complexity associated with each proximal plate fixation configuration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A segmental defect was created in 21 synthetic osteoporotic adult femurs 6 cm proximal to the distal femur and all specimens were stabilised with a 246 mm locking femur plate. Fixation in the most proximal hole was varied by use of either a cerclage cable, unicortical locking screw, or a bicortical locking screw. Specimens were tested to failure in simultaneous eccentric compression and torsion.

RESULTS

Proximal cerclage fixation demonstrated higher mean maximum axial force at failure (4142.67±178.71 N, p<0.001), stiffness (443.8±61.64 N/mm), and maximum torque (20.9±0.93 N m, p<0.001). Unicortical and bicortical screw refractures occurred at the screw, cerclage wire refractures occurred at the first proximal screw distal to the cerclage.

CONCLUSIONS

In periprosthetic distal femur fracture locking plate fixation, proximal hole stabilization with a cerclage wire tolerates significantly higher failure forces while distributing forces distal to the area within the plate fixation. Cerclage wiring may be an option in distal femur periprosthetic fractures to alleviate stress risers in vulnerable bone.

Bicortical screw fixation provides superior biomechanical stability but devastating failure modes in periprosthetic femur fracture care using locking plates

PURPOSE

The incidence of periprosthetic fractures is inevitably increasing. Sufficient stabilisation and proper screw placement next to large-volume implants remains difficult. Modern locking plates allow polyaxial, thus bicortical, screw placement around a prosthetic stem. This study analysed the biomechanical properties of different screw configurations in a locking plate construct of a periprosthetic femoral fracture model.

METHODS

A total of 20 Sawbones were used to stabilise a Vancouver-B1 femoral fracture with a locking plate using either four monocortical screws or three bicortical screws for proximal fixation. These were loaded with an increasing axial compression until failure.

RESULTS

Bicortical screw purchase was significantly superior to monocortical regarding load to failure (1,510 N ± 284 N versus 2,350 N ± 212 N, p < 0.001) and maximal number of cycles (6803 ± 760 versus 4041 ± 923, p < 0.001). However, the mode of failure in the bicortical group was a severe comminuted fracture pattern as opposed to the monocortical group in which a pull-out of the screws without further damage to the bone was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Bicortical screw placement enhances the primary stability in treating periprosthetic femoral fractures. Notably, the mode of failure may limit the salvage options in case of revision surgery.

Dynamic locking screw improves fixation strength in osteoporotic bone: an in vitro study on an artificial bone model

PURPOSE

The novel dynamic locking screw (DLS) was developed to improve bone healing with locked-plate osteosynthesis by equalising construct stiffness at both cortices. Due to a theoretical damping effect, this modulated stiffness could be beneficial for fracture fixation in osteoporotic bone. Therefore, the mechanical behaviour of the DLS at the screw-bone interface was investigated in an artificial osteoporotic bone model and compared with conventional locking screws (LHS).

METHODS

Osteoporotic surrogate bones were plated with either a DLS or a LHS construct consisting of two screws and cyclically axially loaded (8,500 cycles, amplitude 420 N, increase 2 mN/cycle). Construct stiffness, relative movement, axial screw migration, proximal (P) and distal (D) screw pullout force and loosening at the bone interface were determined and statistically evaluated.

RESULTS

DLS constructs exhibited a higher screw pullout force of P 85 N [standard deviation (SD) 21] and D 93 N (SD 12) compared with LHS (P 62 N, SD 28, p = 0.1; D 57 N, SD 25, p < 0.01) and a significantly lower axial migration over cycles compared with LHS (p = 0.01). DLS constructs showed significantly lower axial construct stiffness (403 N/mm, SD 21, p < 0.01) and a significantly higher relative movement (1.1 mm, SD 0.05, p < 0.01) compared with LHS (529 N/mm, SD 27; 0.8 mm, SD 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Based on the model data, the DLS principle might also improve in vivo plate fixation in osteoporotic bone, providing enhanced residual holding strength and reducing screw cutout. The influence of pin-sleeve abutment still needs to be investigated.