• Injury · Dec 2023

    Mechanical evaluation of revision surgery for femoral shaft nonunion initially treated with intramedullary nailing: Exchange nailing versus augmentation plating.

    • Hideyuki Mimata, Yusuke Matsuura, Sei Yano, Seiji Ohtori, and Mitsugu Todo.
    • Research Center of Computational Mechanics, Inc., 1-7-1 Togoshi, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo 141-0041, Japan. Electronic address: hideyuki.mimata@gmail.com.
    • Injury. 2023 Dec 1; 54 (12): 111163111163.

    IntroductionExchange nailing (EN) or augmentation plating (AP) has been employed to treat nonunions after intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft fractures. Although instability is a factor in hypertrophic nonunion, mechanical evaluations have been limited because the contribution of the callus to fracture site stability varies with healing. Our previous study illustrated the potential for evaluation using a finite element analysis (FEA) that incorporates callus material properties. This study aimed to mechanically evaluate revision surgery for nonunions using FEA.Materials And MethodsA quantitative computed tomography-based FEA was performed on virtual revision models of a patient with suspected nonunion after intramedullary nailing. In addition to the initial nailing model (IN) with an 11-mm diameter (D) and 360-mm length (L), four EN models with D12mm (EN1), D13mm (EN2), D12mm-L400mm (EN3), and D13mm-L400mm (EN4) nails and three AP models with 5- (AP1), 6- (AP2), and 7-hole (AP3) plates were created. As with bone, callus was assigned inhomogeneous material properties derived from density based on an empirical formula. The hip joint reaction force and muscle forces at maximum load during the gait cycle were applied. The volume ratio of the callus at the fracture site with a tensile failure risk of ≥1 (tensile failure ratio) and bone fragment movement were evaluated.ResultsThe tensile failure ratio was 11.6 % (IN), 10.1 % (EN1), 6.3 % (EN2), 10.9 % (EN3), 6.2 % (EN4), 6.4 % (AP1), 7.2 % (AP2), and 7.7 % (AP3), respectively. The bone fragment movement showed an opening on the lateral side with the initial intramedullary nailing. However, both revision surgeries reduced the opening, leading to compression except in the EN1 model. The proximal bone fragments were internally rotated relative to the distal fragments, and the rotational instability was more suppressed in models with lower tensile failure ratio.ConclusionsFor EN, the increase in diameter, not length, is important to suppress instability. AP reduces instability, comparable to a 2 mm increase in nail diameter, and screw fixation closer to the fracture site reduces instability. This study suggest that AP is mechanically equivalent to EN and could be an option for revision surgery for femoral shaft nonunions.Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.