Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 9, Issue 6 | Pages 314 - 321
1 Jun 2020
Bliven E Sandriesser S Augat P von Rüden C Hackl S

Aims

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.

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.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 6 | Pages 379 - 387
1 Jun 2018
Hansen L De Raedt S Jørgensen PB Mygind-Klavsen B Kaptein B Stilling M

Objectives. 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. Methods. 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). Results. A total of 288 dynamic RSA images were analyzed. Systematic bias for DRR and MBM with respect to MM in translations (p < 0.018 mm) and rotations (p < 0.009°) were approximately 0. Pitman’s test showed lower random variation in all degrees of freedom for DRR compared with MBM (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Systematic error was approximately 0 for both DRR or MBM. However, precision of DRR was statistically significantly better than MBM. Since DRR does not require marker insertion it can be used for investigation of preoperative hip kinematics in comparison with the postoperative results after joint preserving hip surgery. . Cite this article: L. Hansen, S. De Raedt, P. B. Jørgensen, B. Mygind-Klavsen, B. Kaptein, M. Stilling. Marker free model-based radiostereometric analysis for evaluation of hip joint kinematics: A validation study. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:379–387. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.76.BJR-2017-0268.R1