• Zhi-Min Zeng, Cong-Feng Luo, Sven Putnis, and Bing-Fang Zeng.
• Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital affiliated to Shanghai JiaoTong University, 600 Yisan Road. Shanghai, 200233, PR China.
• Knee. 2011 Jan 1;18(1):51-4.

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical strength of four different fixation methods for a posteromedial tibial plateau split fracture. Twenty-eight tibial plateau fractures were simulated using right-sided synthetic tibiae models. Each fracture model was randomly instrumented with one of the four following constructs, anteroposterior lag-screws, an anteromedial limited contact dynamic compression plate (LC-DCP), a lateral locking plate, or a posterior T-shaped buttress plate. Vertical subsidence of the posteromedial fragment was measured from 500 N to 1500 N during biomechanical testing, the maximum load to failure was also determined. It was found that the posterior T-shaped buttress plate allowed the least subsidence of the posteromedial fragment and produced the highest mean failure load than each of the other three constructs (P=0.00). There was no statistical significant difference between using lag screws or an anteromedial LC-DCP construct for the vertical subsidence at a 1500 N load and the load to failure (P>0.05). This study showed that a posterior-based buttress technique is biomechanically the most stable in-vitro fixation method for posteromedial split tibial plateau fractures, with AP screws and anteromedial-based LC-DCP are not as stable for this type of fracture.Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

20 keywords...

hide…