Primary stability of cement augmentation in locking plate fixation for proximal humeral fractures: A comparison of absorbable versus non-absorbable cement.

BACKGROUND: Cement augmentation has been suggested to increase the stability of screw anchoring in osteoporotic humeral fractures. Initial results are promising but may be jeopardized by cement leakage into the joint and difficult implant removal. Absorbable cement might have advantages in this regard, but it is unclear if the primary stability of both techniques is equivalent to each other. Therefore, this study aimed to compare its primary stability with that of non-absorbable cement augmentation. METHODS: Nineteen cadaveric humeri with two-part fracture models were treated with locking plate osteosynthesis and cement augmentation using either absorbable calcium phosphate cement (group 1) or polymethylmethacrylate (group 2). Fracture movement, stiffness, failure mode, and ultimate load under cyclic compressive loading were examined and compared between the groups. FINDINGS: The absolute and relative stiffness values in group 1 were significantly smaller than those in group 2 after 50 cycles (group 1: 114 ± 38 N/mm and 94 ± 8% vs. group 2: 188 ± 71 N/mm and 106 ± 9%; p50 = 0.022), 2000 cycles (group 1: 97 ± 34 N/mm and 81 ± 15% vs. group 2: 153 ± 47 N/mm and 88 ± 15%; p2000 = 0.028), and 5000 cycles (group 1: 98 ± 40 N/mm and 81 ± 22% vs. group 2: 158 ± 40 N/mm and 92 ± 16%; p5000 = 0.028). The failure load was not statistically significantly different between the groups. INTERPRETATION: Although the PMAA group showed higher values for absolute and relative stiffness, no statistically significant difference was found in the primary stability between absorbable and non-absorbable cement augmentation supporting plate osteosynthesis in proximal humeral fractures. In view of the potential advantages of bio-absorbable cement during the healing process, its use should be considered for the augmentation and stabilization of osteoporotic fractures.

Restricted cement augmentation in unstable geriatric midthoracic fractures treated by long-segmental posterior stabilization leads to a comparable construct stability.

The goal of this study is to compare the construct stability of long segmental dorsal stabilization in unstable midthoracic osteoporotic fractures with complete pedicle screw cement augmentation (ComPSCA) versus restricted pedicle screw cement augmentation (ResPSCA) of the most cranial and caudal pedicle screws under cyclic loading. Twelve fresh frozen human cadaveric specimens (Th4-Th10) from individuals aged 65 years and older were tested in a biomechanical cadaver study. All specimens received a DEXA scan and computer tomography (CT) scan prior to testing. All specimens were matched into pairs. These pairs were randomized into the ComPSCA group and ResPSCA group. An unstable Th7 fracture was simulated. Periodic bending in flexion direction with a torque of 2.5 Nm and 25,000 cycles was applied. Markers were applied to the vertebral bodies to measure segmental movement. After testing, a CT scan of all specimens was performed. The mean age of the specimens was 87.8 years (range 74-101). The mean T-score was - 3.6 (range - 1.2 to - 5.3). Implant failure was visible in three specimens, two of the ComPSCA group and one of the ResPSCA group, affecting only one pedicle screw in each case. Slightly higher segmental movement could be evaluated in these three specimens. No further statistically significant differences were observed between the study groups. The construct stability under cyclic loading in flexion direction of long segmental posterior stabilization of an unstable osteoporotic midthoracic fracture using ResPSCA seems to be comparable to ComPSCA.