• Zhi-Yuan Fan, Lin-Yuan Shu, Ying-Zhe Jin, Matthew C Sherrier, Bo-Hao Yin, Chen-Jun Liu, Shi Zhan, Hui Sun, and Wei Zhang.
• Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 YiShan Road, Shanghai 200233, China.
• Injury. 2022 Dec 1; 53 (12): 388738933887-3893.

ObjectiveTo compare the biomechanical properties of compression buttress screw (CBS) fixation with three plate fixation methods for the treatment of vertical femoral neck fractures (FNFs).MethodsA total of forty synthetic femoral models with simulated Pauwels type III fractures (angle of 70°) were equally assigned to one of four fixation groups: CBS fixation, anteromedial plate fixation (AMP), medial buttress plate fixation (MBP) and medial buttress plate fixation without proximal screw (MBPw). Within each group, half of the specimens were randomly assigned to two loading settings, an axial compression loading test and a hip-flexion torsion test.ResultsThere were no significant differences in axial load to failure, axial stiffness, torsional strength, or torsional stiffness when comparing CBS with MBP (p>0.05). In the axial compression loading test, both CBS and MBP showed higher load to failure and axial stiffness than MBPw (p<0.05). In torsional testing, AMP exhibited superior torsional strength and torsional stiffness than both MBPw and MBP (all p<0.05) and a higher torsional strength than CBS fixation (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in torsional stiffness between the CBS and AMP fixation groups (p>0.05).ConclusionThe biomechanical parameters of CBS fixation are comparable to that of AMP and MBP, and demonstrate superior axial stiffness than MBPw fixation. Although the CBS method for surgical fixation of vertical FNF holds promise as a less invasive surgical technique than plate fixation with similar biomechanical assessments, further clinical evaluation is warranted.Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

16 keywords...

hide…