Objectives. Opening wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO) is an established surgical procedure for the treatment of early-stage knee arthritis. Other than infection, the majority of complications are related to mechanical factors – in particular, stimulation of healing at the osteotomy site. This study used finite element (FE) analysis to investigate the effect of plate design and bridging span on interfragmentary movement (IFM) and the influence of fracture healing on plate stress and potential failure. Materials and Methods. A 10° opening wedge HTO was created in a composite tibia. Imaging and strain gauge data were used to create and validate FE models. Models of an intact tibia and a tibia implanted with a
Evaluate if treating an unstable femoral neck fracture with a locking plate and spring-loaded telescoping screw system would improve construct stability compared to gold standard treatment methods. A 31B2 Pauwels’ type III osteotomy with additional posterior wedge was cut into 30 fresh-frozen femur cadavers implanted with either: three cannulated screws in an inverted triangle configuration (CS), a sliding hip screw and anti-rotation screw (SHS), or a locking plate system with spring-loaded telescoping screws (LP). Dynamic cyclic compressive testing representative of walking with increasing weight-bearing was applied until failure was observed. Loss of fracture reduction was recorded using a high-resolution optical motion tracking system.Aims
Methods
To validate the precision of digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) radiostereometric analysis (RSA) and the model-based method (MBM) RSA with respect to benchmark marker-based (MM) RSA for evaluation of kinematics in the native hip joint. Seven human cadaveric hemipelves were CT scanned and bone models were segmented. Tantalum beads were placed in the pelvis and proximal femoral bone. RSA recordings of the hips were performed during flexion, adduction and internal rotation. Stereoradiographic recordings were all analyzed with DRR, MBM and MM. Migration results for the MBM and DRR with respect to MM were compared. Precision was assessed as systematic bias (mean difference) and random variation (Pitman’s test for equal variance).Objectives
Methods
