RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Taylor Spatial Frame™ (TSF) is a versatile variant of the traditional Ilizarov circular fixator. Although in widespread use, little comparative data exist to quantify the biomechanical effect of substituting the tried-and-tested Ilizarov construct for the TSF hexapod system. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study was designed to investigate the mechanical properties of the TSF system under physiologic loads, with and without the addition of a simulated bone model, with comparison to the standard Ilizarov frame. METHODS: The mechanical behaviors of three identical four-ring TSF and Ilizarov constructs were tested under levels of axial compression, bending, and rotational torque to simulate loading during normal gait. An acrylic-pipe fracture model subsequently was mounted, using fine wires and 5 mm half pins, and the testing was repeated. Load-deformation curves, and so rigidity, for each construct were calculated, with statistical comparisons performed using paired t-tests. RESULTS: Under axial loading, the TSF was found to be less rigid than the Ilizarov frame (645 ± 57 N/mm versus 1269 ± 256 N/mm; mean difference, 623 N/mm; 95% CI, 438.3-808.5 N/mm; p < 0.001), but more rigid under bending and torsional loads (bending: 42 ± 9 Nm/degree versus 78 ± 13 Nm/degree; mean difference, 37 Nm/degree; 95% CI, 25.0-47.9 Nm/degree; p < 0.001; torsion: 16 ± 2 Nm/degree versus 5 ± 0.35 Nm/degree; mean difference, 11 Nm/degree; 95% CI, 9.5-12.2 Nm/degree; p < 0.001). On mounting the bone models, these relationships broadly remained in the half-pin and fine-wire groups, however the half-pin constructs were universally more rigid than those using fine wires. This effect resulted in the TSF, using half pins, showing no difference in axial rigidity to the fine-wire Ilizarov (107 ± 3 N/mm versus 107 ± 4 N/mm; mean difference, 0.05 N/mm; 95% CI, -6.99 to 7.1 N/mm; p > 0.999), while retaining greater bending and torsional rigidity. Throughout testing, a small amount of laxity was observed in the TSF construct on either side of neutral loading, amounting to 0.72 mm (±0.37 mm) for a change in loading between -10 N and 10 N axial load, and which persisted with the addition of the synthetic fracture model. CONCLUSIONS: This study broadly shows the TSF construct to generate lower axial rigidity, but greater bending and torsional rigidity, when compared with the Ilizarov frame, under physiologic loads. The anecdotally described laxity in the TSF hexapod strut system was shown in vitro, but only at low levels of loading around neutral. It also was shown that the increased stiffness generated by use of half pins produced a TSF construct replicating the axial rigidity of a fine-wire Ilizarov frame, for which much evidence of good clinical and radiologic outcomes exist, while providing greater rigidity and so improved resistance to potentially detrimental bending and rotational shear loads. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: If replicated in the clinical setting, these findings suggest that when using the TSF, care should be taken to minimize the observed laxity around neutral with appropriate preloading of the construct, but that its use may produce constructs better able to resist bending and torsional loading, although with lower axial rigidity. Use of half pins in a TSF construct however may replicate the axial mechanical behavior of an Ilizarov construct, which is thought to be conducive to bone healing.
Assuntos
Pinos Ortopédicos , Fixadores Externos , Técnica de Ilizarov/instrumentação , Fenômenos Biomecânicos , Força Compressiva , Desenho de Equipamento , Falha de Equipamento , Teste de Materiais , Rotação , Estresse Mecânico , TorqueRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Fine-wire circular frame (Ilizarov) fixators are hypothesized to generate favorable biomechanical conditions for fracture healing, allowing axial micromotion while limiting interfragmentary shear. Use of half-pins increases fixation options and may improve patient comfort by reducing muscle irritation, but they are thought to induce interfragmentary shear, converting beam-to-cantilever loading. Little evidence exists regarding the magnitude and type of strain in such constructs during weightbearing. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This biomechanical study was designed to investigate the levels of interfragmentary strain occurring during physiologic loading of an Ilizarov frame and the effect on this of substituting half-pins for fine-wires. METHODS: The "control" construct was comprised of a four-ring all fine-wire construct with plain wires at 90°-crossing angles in an entirely unstable acrylic pipe synthetic fracture model. Various configurations, substituting half-pins for wires, were tested under levels of axial compression, cantilever bending, and rotational torque simulating loading during gait. In total three frames were tested for each of five constructs, from all fine-wire to all half-pin. RESULTS: Substitution of half-pins for wires was associated with increased overall construct rigidity and reduced planar interfragmentary motion, most markedly between all-wire and all-pin frames (axial: 5.9 mm ± 0.7 vs 4.2 mm ± 0.1, mean difference, 1.7 mm, 95% CI, 0.8-2.6 mm, p < 0.001; torsional: 1.4% ± 0.1 vs 1.1% ± 0.0 rotational shear, mean difference, 0.3%, 95% CI, 0.1%-0.5%, p = 0.011; bending: 7.5° ± 0.1 vs 3.4° ± 0.1, mean difference, -4.1°, 95% CI, -4.4° to -3.8°, p < 0.001). Although greater transverse shear strain was observed during axial loading (0.4% ± 0.2 vs 1.9% ± 0.1, mean difference, 1.4%, 95% CI, 1.0%-1.9%, p < 0.001), this increase is unlikely to be of clinical relevance given the current body of evidence showing bone healing under shear strains of up to 25%. The greatest transverse shear was observed under bending loads in all fine-wire frames, approaching 30% (29% ± 1.9). This was reduced to 8% (±0.2) by incorporation of sagittal plane half-pins and 7% (±0.2) in all half-pin frames (mean difference, -13.2% and -14.0%, 95% CI, -16.6% to 9.7% and -17.5% to -10.6%, both p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate use of half-pins may reduce levels of shear strain on physiologic loading of circular frames without otherwise altering the fracture site mechanical environment at levels likely to be clinically important. Given the limitations of a biomechanical study using a symmetric and uniform synthetic bone model, further clinical studies are needed to confirm these conclusions in vivo. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings of this study add to the overall understanding of the mechanics of circular frame fixation and, if replicated in the clinical setting, may be applied to the preoperative planning of frame treatment, particularly in unstable fractures or bone transport where control of shear strain is a priority.
Assuntos
Pinos Ortopédicos , Fios Ortopédicos , Fixadores Externos , Consolidação da Fratura , Fraturas Ósseas/cirurgia , Técnica de Ilizarov/instrumentação , Fenômenos Biomecânicos , Substitutos Ósseos , Fraturas Ósseas/fisiopatologia , Modelos Anatômicos , Desenho de Prótese , Estresse MecânicoRESUMO
Dermabond® is a tissue adhesive commonly used for wound or surgical incision closure. Its use has previously been associated with a reduction in wound infection, and it has been thought to act as a physical barrier to bacteria accessing the wound. This study aimed to establish whether the Dermabond® adhesive demonstrated any intrinsic antimicrobial properties. Solidified pellets of Dermabond® were placed on standardised Agar plates cultured with a variety of pathogens. Inhibition of growth was demonstrated against Gram-positive bacteria. Culture swabs taken from the inhibition rings demonstrated no growth, suggesting that Dermabond has a bactericidal mechanism of action. Based on the design of this study, the results suggest that Dermabond® demonstrates bactericidal properties against Gram-positive bacteria. Its use for wound closure following surgical intervention may reduce postoperative wound infection by Gram-positive organisms.