Home
Scholarly Works
Periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures...
Journal article

Periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures following knee arthroplasty: a biomechanical comparison of four methods of fixation

Abstract

PurposeThe aim of this study was to determine the biomechanical properties of four fixation options for periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures.MethodsFourth-generation composite femurs were implanted with a posterior-stabilizing femoral component of total knee arthroplasty. All femurs were osteotomized to produce a AO/OTA 33-A3 fracture pattern and four different constructs were tested: (1) non-locking plate; (2) polyaxial locking plate; (3) intramedullary fibular strut allograft with polyaxial locking plate; (4) retrograde intramedullary nail. The composite femurs underwent non-destructive tests to determine construct stiffness in axial and torsional cyclic loading. The final testing consisted of quasi-static axial loading until failure.ResultsUnder cyclic torsional loading, the retrograde intramedullary nail was less stiff than non-locking plate, polyaxial locking plate and intramedullary fibular strut allograft with polyaxial locking plate (p = 0.046). No differences were detected in cyclic axial loading between the different constructs. During quasi-static axial loading to failure, the intramedullary nail achieved the highest axial stiffness while the non-locking plate showed the lowest (p = 0.036).ConclusionsThe intramedullary fibular strut allograft with polyaxial locking plate did not prove to be significantly better to the polyaxial locking plate only in a periprosthetic distal femur fracture model.

Authors

Mäkinen TJ; Dhotar HS; Fichman SG; Gunton MJ; Woodside M; Safir O; Backstein D; Willett TL; Kuzyk PRT

Journal

International Orthopaedics, Vol. 39, No. 9, pp. 1737–1742

Publisher

Springer Nature

Publication Date

October 1, 2015

DOI

10.1007/s00264-015-2764-0

ISSN

0341-2695

Contact the Experts team