Two Cannulated Screws Provide Sufficient Biomechanical Strength for Prophylactic Fixation in Adult Patients With an Aggressive Benign Femoral Neck Lesion

Biomechanical performance of the novel assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage in single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A finite element analysis

Introduction: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is widely accepted as the gold standard surgical procedure for treating cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. However, there is concern about the low fusion rate in the early period after ACDF surgery using the Zero-P fusion cage. We creatively designed an assembled uncoupled joint fusion device to improve the fusion rate and solve the implantation difficulties. This study aimed to assess the biomechanical performance of the assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage in single-level ACDF and compare it with the Zero-P device.

Methods: A three-dimensional finite element (FE) of a healthy cervical spine (C2−C7) was constructed and validated. In the one-level surgery model, either an assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage or a zero-profile device was implanted at the C5–C6 segment of the model. A pure moment of 1.0 Nm combined with a follower load of 75 N was imposed at C2 to determine flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. The segmental range of motion (ROM), facet contact force (FCF), maximum intradiscal pressure (IDP), and screw−bone stress were determined and compared with those of the zero-profile device.

Results: The results showed that the ROMs of the fused levels in both models were nearly zero, while the motions of the unfused segments were unevenly increased. The FCF at adjacent segments in the assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage group was less than that that of the Zero-P group. The IDP at the adjacent segments and screw–bone stress were slightly higher in the assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage group than in those of the Zero-P group. Stress on the cage was mainly concentrated on both sides of the wings, reaching 13.4–20.4 Mpa in the assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage group.

Conclusion: The assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage provided strong immobilization, similar to the Zero-P device. When compared with the Zero-P group, the assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage achieved similar resultant values regarding FCF, IDP, and screw–bone stress. Moreover, the assembled uncovertebral joint fusion cage effectively achieved early bone formation and fusion, probably due to proper stress distributions in the wings of both sides.

Biomechanical study of internal fixation methods for femoral neck fractures based on Pauwels angle

Objective: To select the most appropriate internal fixation method based on the Pauwels angle, in order to provide a new concept for clinical accurate treatment of femoral neck fractures (FNFs). Methods: FNFs models of Pauwels 30 ° ; 40 ° ; 50 ° ; 60 ° were created respectively. For Pauwels ≤ 50 ° , 1, 2 and 3 Cannulated Compression Screws (CCS) and Porous Tantalum Screws (PTS) were used to fix the fracture for the models. For Pauwels 60 ° , 3CCS and Medial Buttress Plate (MBP) combined with 1, 2 and 3CCS were used to fix the fracture. Based on the results of the finite element (FE) analysis, the biomechanical properties of each model were compared by analyzing and evaluating the following four parameters: maximal stress of the bone (MBS), maximal stress of the implants (MIS), maximal displacement of bone (MBD), interfragmentary motion (IFM). Results: At Pauwels 30 ° , the larger parameters were found in 1CCS, which was 94.8 MPa (MBS), 307.7 MPa (MIS), 0.86 mm (MBD) and 0.36 mm (IFM). In 2CCS group, the parameters were 86.1 MPa (MBS), 254.4 MPa (MIS), 0.73 mm (MBD) and 0.27 mm (IFM), which were similar to those of PTS. At Pauwels 40 ° ; 50 ° , with the increase of the number of used CCS, accordingly, the parameters decreased. Particularly, the MIS (Pauwels 50 ° ) of 1CCS was 1,195.3 MPa, but the other were less than the yield range of the materials. At Pauwels 60 ° , the MBS of 3CCS group was 128.6 Mpa, which had the risk of failure. In 2CCS + MBP group, the parameters were 124.2 MPa (MBS), 602.5 MPa (MIS), 0.75 mm (MBD) and 0.48 mm (IFM), The model stability was significantly enhanced after adding MBP. Conclusion: Pauwels type Ⅰ (< 30 ° ) fractures can reduce the number of CCS, and PTS is an appropriate alternative treatment. For Pauwels type Ⅱ fractures ( 30 ° ∼ 50 ° ), the 3CCS fixation method is still recommended. For Pauwels type Ⅲ fractures (> 50 ° ), it is recommended to add MBP to the medial femoral neck and combine with 2CCS to establish a satisfactory fracture healing environment.

Biomechanical and clinical evaluation of interlocking hip screw in Pauwels Ⅲ femoral neck fractures: A comparison with inverted triangle cannulated screws

Purpose: To compare biomechanical and clinical properties of the novel internal fixation Interlocking Hip Screw (IHS) and conventional inverted triangle cannulated screws (ITCS) for treatment of Pauwels Ⅲ femoral neck fractures. Methods: Twenty synthetic femurs were osteotomized to simulate 70° Pauwels Ⅲ femoral neck fractures and randomly divided into two groups: Group IHS and Group ITCS. Specimens were loaded in quasi-static ramped and cyclical compression testing in 25° adduction to analyze for axial stiffness, failure load, and interfragmentary displacement. 21 matched patients with Pauwels Ⅲ femoral neck fracture who received closed reduction and internal fixation from January 2020 to January 2021 in both Group IHS and Group ITCS. Demographic data, time to surgery, operating duration, intraoperative blood loss, number of fluoroscopies, length of hospital stay, fracture healing time, Harris Hip Score (HHS), the score of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and complications such as nonunion, avascular necrosis, and femoral neck shortening were compared. Results: All specimens in the two groups survived in the axial and cyclical compression test. The axial stiffness was significantly higher for Group IHS (277.80 ± 26.58 N/mm) versus Group ITCS (205.33 ± 10.46 N/mm), p < 0.05. The maximum failure loading in Group IHS performed significantly higher than in Group ITCS (1,400.48 ± 71.60 N versus 996.76 ± 49.73 N, p < 0.05). The interfragmentary displacement of the cyclic loading test for Groups IHS and Group ITCS was 1.15 ± 0.11 mm and 1.89 ± 0.14 mm, respectively, p < 0.05. No significant difference was found in terms of demographic data, time to surgery, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay and the occurrence of nonunion and avascular necrosis between groups. Shorter operating duration and fewer intraoperative fluoroscopic views were noticed using IHS compare to ITCS, p < 0.05. The HHS was 72.14 ± 5.76 and 86.62 ± 5.01 in Group IHS, and was 67.29 ± 5.27 and 81.76 ± 5.13 in Group ITCS at 3-month and 6-month follow-up, respectively, p < 0.05. The magnitude of femoral neck shortening was significantly lower in Group IHS compared to Group ITCS (4.80 ± 1.03 mm versus 5.56 ± 1.21 mm, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that IHS provided better biomechanical and clinical performance due to its unique biological and biomechanical mechanisms, compared with ITCS. Thus, IHS is a feasible alternative to ITCS for the fixation of Pauwels Ⅲ femoral neck fractures.

Biomechanical comparison of the undercut thread design versus conventional buttress thread for the lag screw of the dynamic hip screw system

Objective: To compare the fixation stability of the lag screw with a undercut thread design for the dynamic hip screw (DHS) system versus the lag screw with the conventional buttress thread. Methods: The lag screws with the undercut thread (a flat crest feature, a tip-facing undercut feature) and buttress thread were both manufactured. Fixation stability was investigated using cyclic compressive biomechanical testing on custom osteoporotic femoral head sawbone. The forces required for the same vertical displacement in the two types of lag screw were collected to evaluate the resistance to migration. Varus angle was measured on X-ray images to assess the ability in preventing varus collapse. Finite element analysis (FEA) was performed to analyze the stress and strain distribution at the bone-screw interface of the two types of lag screws. Results: The biomechanical test demonstrated that the force required to achieve the same vertical displacement of the lag screw with the undercut thread was significantly larger than the lag screw with conventional buttress thread (p < 0.05). The average varus angles generated by the undercut and buttress threads were 3.38 ± 0.51° and 5.76 ± 0.38°, respectively (p < 0.05). The FEA revealed that the region of high-stress concentration in the bone surrounding the undercut thread was smaller than that surrounding the buttress thread. Conclusion: The proposed DHS system lag screw with the undercut thread had higher migration resistance and superior fixation stability than the lag screw with the conventional buttress thread.