Dynamic Locking Screws in Proximal Humeral Plate Osteosynthesis Demonstrate Superior Fixation Properties: a Biomechanical Study

Overview

Journal J Exp Orthop

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2020 Oct 12

PMID 33044584

Authors

Gunther Sandmann

Atesch Ateschrang

Thomas Freude

Ulrich Stockle

Werner Schmolz

Christian Konrads

Stefan Dobele

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Angular stable implants reduced the complication rate in the treatment of humeral head fractures. But the failure rate is still high. To further reduce the risk of cut-out, cement augmentation of screws was introduced. A reason for failure of plate osteosynthesis might be the extremely high stiffness of the screw-plate interface leading to a loss of reduction and cut-out of screws. A more homogeneous distribution of the forces on all screws may avoid secondary dislocation. We hypothesize that dynamic osteosynthesis minimizes screw loosening and results in a higher load to failure than standard locking screws.

Methods: Twelve paired human humerus specimens were analysed. A standardized three-part fracture model with a metaphyseal defect was simulated. Within each pair of humeri, one was fixed with a Philos plate and standard locking screws (LS), whereas the other humerus was fixed with a Philos plate and dynamic locking screws (DLS). A cyclic varus-bending test or a rotation test with increasing loading force was performed until failure of the screw-bone-fixation.

Results: In the varus bending test, pairs failed by screw loosening in the humeral head. The LS-group reached 2901 (601-5201) load cycles until failure, while the DLS-group failed after 3731 (2001-5601) cycles. This corresponds to a median loading of 195 N for the LS-group and 235 N for the DLS-group (p = 0.028). In the rotation test the LS-group reached a median of 1101 (501-1501) load cycles until failure of fixation occurred, while the DLS-group failed after 1401 (401-2201) cycles (p = 0.225).

Conclusions: Plate fixation using dynamic locking screws for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures demonstrated more load cycles until failure compared to standard locking plate osteosynthesis.

References

Roderer G, Scola A, Schmolz W, Gebhard F, Windolf M, Hofmann-Fliri L . Biomechanical in vitro assessment of screw augmentation in locked plating of proximal humerus fractures. Injury. 2013; 44(10):1327-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.05.008. View

Roderer G, Moll S, Gebhard F, Claes L, Krischak G . Side plate fixation vs. intramedullary nailing in an unstable medial femoral neck fracture model: A comparative biomechanical study. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2010; 26(2):141-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.09.020. View

Kralinger F, Blauth M, Goldhahn J, Kach K, Voigt C, Platz A . The Influence of Local Bone Density on the Outcome of One Hundred and Fifty Proximal Humeral Fractures Treated with a Locking Plate. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014; 96(12):1026-1032. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00028. View

Edwards S, Wilson N, Zhang L, Flores S, Merk B . Two-part surgical neck fractures of the proximal part of the humerus. A biomechanical evaluation of two fixation techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88(10):2258-64. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.E.00757. View

Brunner F, Sommer C, Bahrs C, Heuwinkel R, Hafner C, Rillmann P . Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures using a proximal humeral locked plate: a prospective multicenter analysis. J Orthop Trauma. 2009; 23(3):163-72. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181920e5b. View

Lorenz G, Schonthaler W, Huf W, Komjati M, Fialka C, Boesmueller S . Complication rate after operative treatment of three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus: locking plate osteosynthesis versus proximal humeral nail. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020; 47(6):2055-2064. DOI: 10.1007/s00068-020-01380-7. View

Roderer G, Erhardt J, Kuster M, Vegt P, Bahrs C, Kinzl L . Second generation locked plating of proximal humerus fractures--a prospective multicentre observational study. Int Orthop. 2010; 35(3):425-32. PMC: 3047638. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-010-1015-7. View

Dobele S, Horn C, Eichhorn S, Buchholtz A, Lenich A, Burgkart R . The dynamic locking screw (DLS) can increase interfragmentary motion on the near cortex of locked plating constructs by reducing the axial stiffness. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2010; 395(4):421-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00423-010-0636-z. View

Horn J, Gueorguiev B, Brianza S, Steen H, Schwieger K . Biomechanical evaluation of two-part surgical neck fractures of the humerus fixed by an angular stable locked intramedullary nail. J Orthop Trauma. 2011; 25(7):406-13. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181ffdf9a. View

10.

Alispahic N, Brorson S, Bahrs C, Joeris A, Steinitz A, Audige L . Complications after surgical management of proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review of event terms and definitions. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020; 21(1):327. PMC: 7251821. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-020-03353-8. View

11.

Dobele S, Gardner M, Schroter S, Hontzsch D, Stockle U, Freude T . DLS 5.0--the biomechanical effects of dynamic locking screws. PLoS One. 2014; 9(4):e91933. PMC: 3982949. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091933. View

12.

Knierzinger D, Crepaz-Eger U, Hengg C, Kralinger F . Does cement augmentation of the screws in angular stable plating for proximal humerus fractures influence the radiological outcome: a retrospective assessment. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020; 140(10):1413-1421. PMC: 7505823. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-020-03362-1. View

13.

Vicenti G, Pesce V, Tartaglia N, Abate A, Mori C, Moretti B . Micromotion in the fracture healing of closed distal metaphyseal tibial fractures: A multicentre prospective study. Injury. 2014; 45 Suppl 6:S27-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.10.019. View

14.

Unger S, Erhart S, Kralinger F, Blauth M, Schmoelz W . The effect of in situ augmentation on implant anchorage in proximal humeral head fractures. Injury. 2012; 43(10):1759-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2012.07.003. View

15.

Brianza S, Plecko M, Gueorguiev B, Windolf M, Schwieger K . Biomechanical evaluation of a new fixation technique for internal fixation of three-part proximal humerus fractures in a novel cadaveric model. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2010; 25(9):886-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.06.015. View

16.

Voigt C, Geisler A, Hepp P, Schulz A, Lill H . Are polyaxially locked screws advantageous in the plate osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fractures in the elderly? A prospective randomized clinical observational study. J Orthop Trauma. 2011; 25(10):596-602. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e318206eb46. View

17.

Siffri P, Peindl R, Coley E, Norton J, Connor P, Kellam J . Biomechanical analysis of blade plate versus locking plate fixation for a proximal humerus fracture: comparison using cadaveric and synthetic humeri. J Orthop Trauma. 2006; 20(8):547-54. DOI: 10.1097/01.bot.0000244997.52751.58. View

18.

Martetschlager F, Siebenlist S, Weier M, Sandmann G, Ahrens P, Braun K . Plating of proximal humeral fractures. Orthopedics. 2012; 35(11):e1606-12. DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20121023-17. View

19.

Freude T, Schroeter S, Plecko M, Bahrs C, Martetschlaeger F, Kraus T . Dynamic-locking-screw (DLS)-leads to less secondary screw perforations in proximal humerus fractures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014; 15:194. PMC: 4057594. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-194. View

20.

Biermann N, Prall W, Bocker W, Mayr H, Haasters F . Augmentation of plate osteosynthesis for proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review of current biomechanical and clinical studies. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019; 139(8):1075-1099. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-019-03162-2. View