Comparison of a new intramedullary scaffold to volar plating for treatment of distal radius fractures

Robert J. Van Kampen, Andrew R. Thoreson, Nathan J. Knutson, Joseph E. Hale, Steven Lawrence Moran

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the biomechanical properties of a new nitinol intramedullary (IM) scaffold implant with those of volar plates for the treatment of dorsally comminuted extra-articular distal radius fractures using an established model. METHODS: A dorsal wedge osteotomy was performed on a bone model to simulate a dorsally comminuted extra-articular distal radius fracture. This model was used to compare stiffness of 3 different distal radius fixation devices - an IM scaffold implant, a commercially available titanium volar locking plate, and a stainless steel non-locking T-plate. Six constructs were tested per group. Tolerance for physiological loading was assessed by applying 10,000 cycles of axial loading up to 100 N applied at 2 Hz. Axial and eccentric load stiffness were assessed before cyclic loading and axial stiffness again after cyclic loading. Groups were compared using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Initial axial stiffness (in Newton per millimeter) was significantly (P = 0.011) different only between the volar locking plate (427 ± 43) and non-locking T-plate (235 ± 69). After cyclic loading, axial stiffness was not significantly different between the volar locking plate (392 ± 67) and IM scaffold implant (405 ± 108), but both were significantly (P < 0.001) stiffer than the non-locking T-plate (187 ± 53). Eccentric loading stiffness was not significantly different between the IM scaffold implant (67 ± 140) and volar locking plate (63 ± 5), but both were significantly (P < 0.001) stiffer than the non-locking T-plate (25 ± 4). CONCLUSIONS: Stiffness of the IM scaffold implant and volar locking plate fracture model constructs was equivalent. Biomechanical testing suggests that this novel IM scaffold provides sufficient stability for clinical use, and further testing is warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)535-541
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Volume27
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Radius Fractures
Weight-Bearing
Joints
Stainless Steel
Osteotomy
Titanium
Analysis of Variance
Therapeutics
Bone and Bones
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Biomechanics
  • Distal radius fractures
  • Intramedullary scaffold
  • Stability
  • Volar plating

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Comparison of a new intramedullary scaffold to volar plating for treatment of distal radius fractures. / Van Kampen, Robert J.; Thoreson, Andrew R.; Knutson, Nathan J.; Hale, Joseph E.; Moran, Steven Lawrence.

In: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, Vol. 27, No. 9, 2013, p. 535-541.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Van Kampen, Robert J. ; Thoreson, Andrew R. ; Knutson, Nathan J. ; Hale, Joseph E. ; Moran, Steven Lawrence. / Comparison of a new intramedullary scaffold to volar plating for treatment of distal radius fractures. In: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2013 ; Vol. 27, No. 9. pp. 535-541.
@article{94edf9b0082d4cc49671268a156f653b,
title = "Comparison of a new intramedullary scaffold to volar plating for treatment of distal radius fractures",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: To compare the biomechanical properties of a new nitinol intramedullary (IM) scaffold implant with those of volar plates for the treatment of dorsally comminuted extra-articular distal radius fractures using an established model. METHODS: A dorsal wedge osteotomy was performed on a bone model to simulate a dorsally comminuted extra-articular distal radius fracture. This model was used to compare stiffness of 3 different distal radius fixation devices - an IM scaffold implant, a commercially available titanium volar locking plate, and a stainless steel non-locking T-plate. Six constructs were tested per group. Tolerance for physiological loading was assessed by applying 10,000 cycles of axial loading up to 100 N applied at 2 Hz. Axial and eccentric load stiffness were assessed before cyclic loading and axial stiffness again after cyclic loading. Groups were compared using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Initial axial stiffness (in Newton per millimeter) was significantly (P = 0.011) different only between the volar locking plate (427 ± 43) and non-locking T-plate (235 ± 69). After cyclic loading, axial stiffness was not significantly different between the volar locking plate (392 ± 67) and IM scaffold implant (405 ± 108), but both were significantly (P < 0.001) stiffer than the non-locking T-plate (187 ± 53). Eccentric loading stiffness was not significantly different between the IM scaffold implant (67 ± 140) and volar locking plate (63 ± 5), but both were significantly (P < 0.001) stiffer than the non-locking T-plate (25 ± 4). CONCLUSIONS: Stiffness of the IM scaffold implant and volar locking plate fracture model constructs was equivalent. Biomechanical testing suggests that this novel IM scaffold provides sufficient stability for clinical use, and further testing is warranted.",
keywords = "Biomechanics, Distal radius fractures, Intramedullary scaffold, Stability, Volar plating",
author = "{Van Kampen}, {Robert J.} and Thoreson, {Andrew R.} and Knutson, {Nathan J.} and Hale, {Joseph E.} and Moran, {Steven Lawrence}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182793df7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "535--541",
journal = "Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma",
issn = "0890-5339",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of a new intramedullary scaffold to volar plating for treatment of distal radius fractures

AU - Van Kampen, Robert J.

AU - Thoreson, Andrew R.

AU - Knutson, Nathan J.

AU - Hale, Joseph E.

AU - Moran, Steven Lawrence

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To compare the biomechanical properties of a new nitinol intramedullary (IM) scaffold implant with those of volar plates for the treatment of dorsally comminuted extra-articular distal radius fractures using an established model. METHODS: A dorsal wedge osteotomy was performed on a bone model to simulate a dorsally comminuted extra-articular distal radius fracture. This model was used to compare stiffness of 3 different distal radius fixation devices - an IM scaffold implant, a commercially available titanium volar locking plate, and a stainless steel non-locking T-plate. Six constructs were tested per group. Tolerance for physiological loading was assessed by applying 10,000 cycles of axial loading up to 100 N applied at 2 Hz. Axial and eccentric load stiffness were assessed before cyclic loading and axial stiffness again after cyclic loading. Groups were compared using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Initial axial stiffness (in Newton per millimeter) was significantly (P = 0.011) different only between the volar locking plate (427 ± 43) and non-locking T-plate (235 ± 69). After cyclic loading, axial stiffness was not significantly different between the volar locking plate (392 ± 67) and IM scaffold implant (405 ± 108), but both were significantly (P < 0.001) stiffer than the non-locking T-plate (187 ± 53). Eccentric loading stiffness was not significantly different between the IM scaffold implant (67 ± 140) and volar locking plate (63 ± 5), but both were significantly (P < 0.001) stiffer than the non-locking T-plate (25 ± 4). CONCLUSIONS: Stiffness of the IM scaffold implant and volar locking plate fracture model constructs was equivalent. Biomechanical testing suggests that this novel IM scaffold provides sufficient stability for clinical use, and further testing is warranted.

AB - OBJECTIVES: To compare the biomechanical properties of a new nitinol intramedullary (IM) scaffold implant with those of volar plates for the treatment of dorsally comminuted extra-articular distal radius fractures using an established model. METHODS: A dorsal wedge osteotomy was performed on a bone model to simulate a dorsally comminuted extra-articular distal radius fracture. This model was used to compare stiffness of 3 different distal radius fixation devices - an IM scaffold implant, a commercially available titanium volar locking plate, and a stainless steel non-locking T-plate. Six constructs were tested per group. Tolerance for physiological loading was assessed by applying 10,000 cycles of axial loading up to 100 N applied at 2 Hz. Axial and eccentric load stiffness were assessed before cyclic loading and axial stiffness again after cyclic loading. Groups were compared using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Initial axial stiffness (in Newton per millimeter) was significantly (P = 0.011) different only between the volar locking plate (427 ± 43) and non-locking T-plate (235 ± 69). After cyclic loading, axial stiffness was not significantly different between the volar locking plate (392 ± 67) and IM scaffold implant (405 ± 108), but both were significantly (P < 0.001) stiffer than the non-locking T-plate (187 ± 53). Eccentric loading stiffness was not significantly different between the IM scaffold implant (67 ± 140) and volar locking plate (63 ± 5), but both were significantly (P < 0.001) stiffer than the non-locking T-plate (25 ± 4). CONCLUSIONS: Stiffness of the IM scaffold implant and volar locking plate fracture model constructs was equivalent. Biomechanical testing suggests that this novel IM scaffold provides sufficient stability for clinical use, and further testing is warranted.

KW - Biomechanics

KW - Distal radius fractures

KW - Intramedullary scaffold

KW - Stability

KW - Volar plating

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883560024&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883560024&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182793df7

DO - 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182793df7

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 535

EP - 541

JO - Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

JF - Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

SN - 0890-5339

IS - 9

ER -