Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2022 / Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 3

The effects of different cortical impingement scenarios on the biomechanical features of retrograde femoral nails in the management of distal femoral fractures: A finite element analysis

Pages
173–177
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Problems related to supraphysiological loadings, such as implant failure and periprosthetic fracture, can be reduced by applying the nail in the central position.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study aimed to assess the effects of different cortical impingement scenarios on the biomechanical features of retrograde femoral nails in managing distal femoral fractures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results: The maximal femoral head movements were 3.11 mm in ACI and 2.91 mm in MCI.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Problems related to supraphysiological loadings, such as implant failure and periprosthetic fracture, can be reduced by applying the nail in the central position.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess the effects of different cortical impingement scenarios on the biomechanical features of retrograde femoral nails in managing distal femoral fractures. Methods: A mesh femur model was constructed using computed tomography (CT) images. Five different cortical impingement (CI) scenarios were designed: central model (CM), lateral CI (LCI), medial CI (MCI), anterior CI (ACI), and posterior CI (PCI). The fixation stability was evaluated by femoral head movement, stress, and elastic strain at the fracture site. The maximum stress on the femoral cortex and the implants were also measured. Results: The maximal femoral head movements were 3.11 mm in ACI and 2.91 mm in MCI. Among all CI models, the highest stress value at the fracture site was recorded in ACI (18.9 MPa), and the maximum stress on the femoral cortex was determined in ACI (114.3 MPa). The highest microstrain value at the fracture site was measured in MCI (599.1 μstrain). In all scenarios, maximum stress was located around the proximal hole of the nail. Conclusion: This study revealed that cortical impingement results in excessive loading on the retrograde femoral nail in managing distal femur fractures. MCI and ACI mainly cause this pathological loading. Problems related to supraphysiological loadings, such as implant failure and periprosthetic fracture, can be reduced by applying the nail in the central position.

🔖

Cite This Article

TAŞATAN, E., KOCADAL, O. (2022). The effects of different cortical impingement scenarios on the biomechanical features of retrograde femoral nails in the management of distal femoral fractures: A finite element analysis. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 3, 173–177. https://ajindex.com/articles/427970

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Court-Brown CM, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: a review. Injury. 2006
  2. 37(8):691-697. [CrossRef] 2. Ehlinger M, Ducrot G, Adam P, Bonnomet F. Distal femur fractures. Surgical techniques and a review of the literature. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013
  3. 99(3):353-360. [CrossRef] 3. Smith JR, Halliday R, Aquilina AL, et al. Distal femoral fractures: the need to review the standard of care. Injury. 2015
  4. 46(6):1084-1088. [CrossRef] 4. Ricci WM, Gallagher B, Haidukewych GJ. Intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures: current concepts. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009
  5. 17(5): 296-305. 5. Handolin L, Pajarinen J, Lindahl J, Hirvensalo E. Retrograde intramedullary nailing in distal femoral fractures--results in a series of 46 consecutive operations. Injury. 2004
  6. 35(5):517-522. [CrossRef] 6. Kumar A, Jasani V, Butt MS. Management of distal femoral fractures in elderly patients using retrograde titanium supracondylar nails. Injury. 2000
  7. 31(3):169- 173. [CrossRef] 7. Ostrum RF, Levy MS. Penetration of the distal femoral anterior cortex during intramedullary nailing for subtrochanteric fractures: a report of three cases. J Orthop Trauma. 2005
  8. 19(9):656-660. [CrossRef] 8. Egol KA, Chang EY, Cvitkovic J, Kummer FJ, Koval KJ. Mismatch of current intramedullary nails with the anterior bow of the femur. J Orthop Trauma. 2004
  9. 18(7):410-415. [CrossRef] 9. Bazylewicz DB, Egol KA, Koval KJ. Cortical encroachment after cephalomedullary nailing of the proximal femur: evaluation of a more anatomic radius of curvature. J Orthop Trauma. 2013
  10. 27(6):303-307. [CrossRef] 10. Roberts JW, Libet LA, Wolinsky PR. Who is in danger? Impingement and penetration of the anterior cortex of the distal femur during intramedullary nailing of proximal femur fractures: preoperatively measurable risk factors. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012
  11. 73(1):249-254. [CrossRef] 11. Chang SM, Song DL, Ma Z, et al. Mismatch of the short straight cephalomedullary nail (PFNA-II) with the anterior bow of the femur in an Asian population. J Orthop Trauma. 2014
  12. 28(1):17-22. [CrossRef] 12. Hussain M, Kakazu R, Jimenez A, Wyrick J. Proximal cortical breach after retrograde femoral nailing for femoral shaft fracture: a case report. JBJS Case Connect. 2020
  13. 10(1):e0388. [CrossRef] 13. Buford Jr WL, Turnbow BJ, Gugala Z, Lindsey RW. Three-dimensional computed tomography–based modeling of sagittal cadaveric femoral bowing and implications for intramedullary nailing. J Orthop Trauma. 2014
  14. 28(1):10-16. [CrossRef] 14.