Biomechanical Comparison of WE43-Based Magnesium Vs. Titanium Miniplates in a Mandible Fracture Model in Sheep

Overview

Journal Materials (Basel)

Publisher MDPI

Date 2023 Jan 8

PMID 36614440

Authors

Heilwig Fischer

Oskar Schmidt-Bleek

Vincenzo Orassi

Dag Wulsten

Katharina Schmidt-Bleek

Max Heiland

Claudius Steffen

Carsten Rendenbach

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

In fractures of the mandible, osteosynthesis with titanium plates is considered the gold standard. Titanium is an established and reliable material, its main disadvantages being metal artefacts and the need for removal in case of osteosynthesis complications. Magnesium, as a resorbable material with an elastic modulus close to cortical bone, offers a resorbable alternative osteosynthesis material, yet mechanical studies in mandible fracture fixation are still missing. The hypothesis of this study was that magnesium miniplates show no significant difference in the mechanical integrity provided for fracture fixation in mandible fractures under load-sharing indications. In a non-inferiority test, a continuous load was applied to a sheep mandible fracture model with osteosynthesis using either titanium miniplates of 1.0 mm thickness (Ti1.0), magnesium plates of 1.75 mm (Mg1.75), or magnesium plates of 1.5 mm thickness (Mg1.5). No significant difference (p > 0.05) was found in the peak force at failure, stiffness, or force at vertical displacement of 1.0 mm between Mg1.75, Mg1.5, and Ti1.0. This study shows the non-inferiority of WE43 magnesium miniplates compared to the clinical gold standard titanium miniplates.

Citing Articles

[Latest research progress of rare earth-magnesium alloys in orthopedics].

Sun Z, Zuo K, Zhu X, Yue H, Gao Z Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2025; 45(2):437-442.

PMID: 40031987 PMC: 11875861. DOI: 10.12122/j.issn.1673-4254.2025.02.24.

Biomechanical comparison of the efficacy of Cfr-PEEK and titanium systems in the fixation following sagittal split advancement osteotomy: a biomechanical study.

Sen E, Torul D BMC Oral Health. 2025; 25(1):107.

PMID: 39833770 PMC: 11748243. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-025-05418-3.

Biomechanical analysis of a magnesium plantar plate prototype system for the first tarsometatarsal joint fusion: a cadaveric study.

Zhou P, Ribeiro M, Greven J, Praster M, Seitz J, Habicht S J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):802.

PMID: 39609865 PMC: 11603798. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-05208-7.

Titanium vs PEO Surface-Modified Magnesium Plate Fixation in a Mandible Bone Healing Model in Sheep.

Turostowski M, Rendenbach C, Herzog P, Ellinghaus A, Prates Soares A, Heiland M ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2024; 10(8):4901-4915.

PMID: 39072479 PMC: 11322917. DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.4c00602.

Magnesium-based alloys with adapted interfaces for bone implants and tissue engineering.

Antoniac I, Manescu Paltanea V, Antoniac A, Paltanea G Regen Biomater. 2023; 10:rbad095.

PMID: 38020233 PMC: 10664085. DOI: 10.1093/rb/rbad095.

References

Pearce A, Richards R, Milz S, Schneider E, Pearce S . Animal models for implant biomaterial research in bone: a review. Eur Cell Mater. 2007; 13:1-10. DOI: 10.22203/ecm.v013a01. View

Ribitsch I, Baptista P, Lange-Consiglio A, Melotti L, Patruno M, Jenner F . Large Animal Models in Regenerative Medicine and Tissue Engineering: To Do or Not to Do. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020; 8:972. PMC: 7438731. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00972. View

Atkinson H, Khan S, Lashgari Y, Ziegler A . Hallux valgus correction utilising a modified short scarf osteotomy with a magnesium biodegradable or titanium compression screws - a comparative study of clinical outcomes. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019; 20(1):334. PMC: 6639924. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-019-2717-7. View

Byun S, Lim H, Cheon K, Lee S, Kim H, Lee J . Biodegradable magnesium alloy (WE43) in bone-fixation plate and screw. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2020; 108(6):2505-2512. PMC: 7383574. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.34582. View

Orassi V, Fischer H, Duda G, Heiland M, Checa S, Rendenbach C . Biomechanical Evaluation of WE43 Magnesium Plates for Mandibular Fracture Fixation. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2022; 9:803103. PMC: 8866862. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.803103. View

Weinans H, Prendergast P . Tissue adaptation as a dynamical process far from equilibrium. Bone. 1996; 19(2):143-9. DOI: 10.1016/8756-3282(96)00143-3. View

Plaass C, von Falck C, Ettinger S, Sonnow L, Calderone F, Weizbauer A . Bioabsorbable magnesium versus standard titanium compression screws for fixation of distal metatarsal osteotomies - 3 year results of a randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sci. 2017; 23(2):321-327. DOI: 10.1016/j.jos.2017.11.005. View

Cankaya A, Kasapoglu M, Erdem M, Kasapoglu C . Effects of polymethylmethacrylate on the stability of screw fixation in mandibular angle fractures: A study on sheep mandibles. Int J Med Sci. 2018; 15(13):1466-1471. PMC: 6216056. DOI: 10.7150/ijms.26697. View

Huh J, Choi B, Kim B, Lee S, Zhu S, Jung J . Critical size defect in the canine mandible. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005; 100(3):296-301. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2004.12.015. View

10.

Sukegawa S, Masui M, Sukegawa-Takahashi Y, Nakano K, Takabatake K, Kawai H . Maxillofacial Trauma Surgery Patients With Titanium Osteosynthesis Miniplates: Remove or Not?. J Craniofac Surg. 2020; 31(5):1338-1342. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000006352. View

11.

Rodrigues D, Falci S, Lauria A, Marchiori E, Moreira R . Mechanical and photoelastic analysis of four different fixation methods for mandibular body fractures. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015; 43(3):306-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2014.11.021. View

12.

Martinez Sanchez A, Luthringer B, Feyerabend F, Willumeit R . Mg and Mg alloys: how comparable are in vitro and in vivo corrosion rates? A review. Acta Biomater. 2014; 13:16-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2014.11.048. View

13.

Einhorn T, Gerstenfeld L . Fracture healing: mechanisms and interventions. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2014; 11(1):45-54. PMC: 4464690. DOI: 10.1038/nrrheum.2014.164. View

14.

Champy M, Lodde J, Schmitt R, Jaeger J, Muster D . Mandibular osteosynthesis by miniature screwed plates via a buccal approach. J Maxillofac Surg. 1978; 6(1):14-21. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-0503(78)80062-9. View

15.

Glatt V, Evans C, Tetsworth K . A Concert between Biology and Biomechanics: The Influence of the Mechanical Environment on Bone Healing. Front Physiol. 2017; 7:678. PMC: 5258734. DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2016.00678. View

16.

Burns B, Fields J, Farinas A, Pollins A, Perdikis G, Thayer W . Comparing maximal forces in resorbable poly-L-lactic acid and titanium plates for mandibular fracture fixation. Heliyon. 2020; 6(4):e03705. PMC: 7132074. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03705. View

17.

Park H, Kim S, Oh J, You J, Kim W . Mini-plate removal in maxillofacial trauma patients during a five-year retrospective study. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 42(4):182-6. PMC: 5009191. DOI: 10.5125/jkaoms.2016.42.4.182. View

18.

Ergun S, Ofluoglu D, Saruhanoglu A, Karatasli B, Deniz E, Ozel S . Comparative evaluation of various miniplate systems for the repair of mandibular corpus fractures. Dent Mater J. 2014; 33(3):368-72. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2013-315. View

19.

Naujokat H, Ruff C, Kluter T, Seitz J, Acil Y, Wiltfang J . Influence of surface modifications on the degradation of standard-sized magnesium plates and healing of mandibular osteotomies in miniature pigs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019; 49(2):272-283. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2019.03.966. View

20.

Rendenbach C, Schoellchen M, Bueschel J, Gauer T, Sedlacik J, Kutzner D . Evaluation and reduction of magnetic resonance imaging artefacts induced by distinct plates for osseous fixation: an in vitro study @ 3 T. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2018; 47(7):20170361. PMC: 6196067. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20170361. View