External fixators are the traditional fixation method of choice for contaminated open fractures. However, patient acceptance is low due to the high profile and therefore physical burden of the constructs. An externalised locking compression plate is a low profile alternative. However, the biomechanical differences have not been assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the axial and torsional stiffness of the externalised titanium locking compression plate (ET-LCP), the externalised stainless steel locking compression plate (ESS-LCP) and the unilateral external fixator (UEF). A fracture gap model was created to simulate comminuted mid-shaft tibia fractures using synthetic composite bones. Fifteen constructs were stabilised with ET-LCP, ESS-LCP or UEF (five constructs each). The constructs were loaded under both axial and torsional directions to determine construct stiffness.Objectives
Methods
We aimed to further evaluate the biomechanical characteristics
of two locking screws Synthetic tubular bone models representing normal bone density
and osteoporotic bone density were used. Artificial fracture gaps
of 1 cm were created in each specimen before fixation with one of
two constructs: 1) two locking screws using a five-hole locking
compression plate (LCP) plate; or 2) three non-locking screws with
a seven-hole LCP plate across each side of the fracture gap. The
stiffness, maximum displacement, mode of failure and number of cycles
to failure were recorded under progressive cyclic torsional and
eccentric axial loading.Objectives
Methods
