Abstract

Background A large number of pelvic injuries are seriously unstable, with mortality rates reaching 19%. Approximately 60% of pelvic injuries are related to the posterior pelvic ring. However, the selection of a fixation method for a posterior pelvic ring injury remains a challenging problem for orthopedic surgeons. The aim of the present study is to investigate the biomechanical performance of five different fixation approaches for posterior pelvic ring injury and thus provide guidance on the choice of treatment approach in a clinical setting. Methods A finite element (FE) model, including the L3-L5 lumbar vertebrae, sacrum, and full pelvis, was created from CT images of a healthy adult. Tile B and Tile C types of pelvic fractures were created in the model. Five different fixation methods for fixing the posterior ring injury (PRI) were simulated: TA1 (conservative treatment), TA2 (S1 screw fixation), TA3 (S1 + S2 screw fixation), TA4 (plate fixation), and TA5 (modified triangular osteosynthesis). Based on the fixation status (fixed or nonfixed) of the anterior ring and the fixation method for PRI, 20 different FE models were created. An upright standing loading scenario was simulated, and the resultant displacements at the sacroiliac joint were compared between different models. Results When TA5 was applied, the resultant displacements at the sacroiliac joint were the smallest (1.5 mm, 1.6 mm, 1.6 mm, and 1.7 mm) for all the injury cases. The displacements induced by TA3 and TA2 were similar to those induced by TA5. TA4 led to larger displacements at the sacroiliac joint (2.3 mm, 2.4 mm, 4.8 mm, and 4.9 mm), and TA1 was the worst case (3.1 mm, 3.2 mm, 6.3 mm, and 6.5 mm). Conclusions The best internal fixation method for PRI is the triangular osteosynthesis approach (TA5), followed by S1 + S2 screw fixation (TA3), S1 screw fixation (TA2), and plate fixation (TA4).

Highlights

  • A large number of pelvic injuries are seriously unstable, with mortality rates reaching 19%

  • When Treatment approach 5 (TA5) was applied, the resultant displacements at the sacroiliac joint were the smallest (1.5 mm, 1.6 mm, 1.6 mm, and 1.7 mm) for all the injury cases. e displacements induced by Treatment approach 3 (TA3) and Treatment approach 2 (TA2) were similar to those induced by TA5

  • Common complications associated with surgery for pelvic ring fractures are pelvic deformity, limb shortening, recurrent fracture site, and so on [3]. erefore, challenges still exist for orthopedic surgeons to find an effective treatment approach for fixing posterior pelvic ring fracture injuries

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A large number of pelvic injuries are seriously unstable, with mortality rates reaching 19%. The selection of a fixation method for a posterior pelvic ring injury remains a challenging problem for orthopedic surgeons. Five different fixation methods for fixing the posterior ring injury (PRI) were simulated: TA1 (conservative treatment), TA2 (S1 screw fixation), TA3 (S1 + S2 screw fixation), TA4 (plate fixation), and TA5 (modified triangular osteosynthesis). An upright standing loading scenario was simulated, and the resultant displacements at the sacroiliac joint were compared between different models. When TA5 was applied, the resultant displacements at the sacroiliac joint were the smallest (1.5 mm, 1.6 mm, 1.6 mm, and 1.7 mm) for all the injury cases. Erefore, challenges still exist for orthopedic surgeons to find an effective treatment approach for fixing posterior pelvic ring fracture injuries. In in vitro mechanical testing, a large number of cadavers are always required due to the intersubject variances, and it is a major challenge to simulate

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call