Odontoid process type II and III fracture fixation using bone allograft screws versus cannulated screws: a biomechanical study

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Pub Date : 2025-03-22 DOI:10.1007/s00402-025-05805-z
Emir Benca, Kenneth P. van Knegsel, Maximilian Pestel, Ivan Zderic, Jan Caspar, Lena Hirtler, Andreas Strassl, Dominic Gehweiler, Sonja Zehetmayer, Boyko Gueorguiev, Harald Widhalm, Reinhard Windhager, Peter Varga
{"title":"Odontoid process type II and III fracture fixation using bone allograft screws versus cannulated screws: a biomechanical study","authors":"Emir Benca,&nbsp;Kenneth P. van Knegsel,&nbsp;Maximilian Pestel,&nbsp;Ivan Zderic,&nbsp;Jan Caspar,&nbsp;Lena Hirtler,&nbsp;Andreas Strassl,&nbsp;Dominic Gehweiler,&nbsp;Sonja Zehetmayer,&nbsp;Boyko Gueorguiev,&nbsp;Harald Widhalm,&nbsp;Reinhard Windhager,&nbsp;Peter Varga","doi":"10.1007/s00402-025-05805-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Fractures of the odontoid process are associated with high non-union rates, challenging treatment, and high incidence of screw-related complications. The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical competence of a single biointegrative bone allograft screw versus two conventional cannulated screws for odontoid fracture fixation.</p><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>The odontoid process of intact C2 vertebral specimens was subjected to quasi-static loading until fracture. Specimens with an Anderson and d’Alonzo type II or III fracture (<i>n</i> = 47) were fixated with either two conventional cannulated screws or with a single bone allograft screw. The constructs were biomechanically tested to failure in the same fashion as in their intact state. Stiffness, yield, and ultimate load were evaluated. The results were adjusted by age, sex, volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), and the cross-sectional area ratio of cortical bone to total bone measured at the junction of the odontoid process with the vertebral body (Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar).</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Stiffness, yield and ultimate load were restored in the cannulated screws group by 44 ± 10%, 46 ± 7%, and 46 ± 5% and in the bone allograft group by 50 ± 12%, 30 ± 9%, and 34 ± 6% (mean ± SE). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding the three mechanical outcomes (0.104 ≤ <i>p</i> ≤ 0.223). Positive significant relation was found between vBMD and stiffness in each group (0.248 ≤ R²≤0.273, 0.018 ≤ <i>p</i> ≤ 0.038), as well as between Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar and stiffness (R²=0.218, <i>p</i> = 0.033), vBMD and ultimate load (R²=0.430, <i>p</i> = 0.001) and ultimate loadand vBMD (R²=0.315, <i>p</i> = 0.010) in the cannulated screws group.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The primary stability of odontoid fracture fixation is determined mainly by the quality of the local bone and independent of the fixation technique. From the biomechanical perspective, the lower mean values for the yield and ultimate load restored in the bone allograft group compared to the cannulated screws group should be compensated by lower peak load during the patient’s rehabilitation process.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8326,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","volume":"145 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00402-025-05805-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00402-025-05805-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Fractures of the odontoid process are associated with high non-union rates, challenging treatment, and high incidence of screw-related complications. The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical competence of a single biointegrative bone allograft screw versus two conventional cannulated screws for odontoid fracture fixation.

Materials and methods

The odontoid process of intact C2 vertebral specimens was subjected to quasi-static loading until fracture. Specimens with an Anderson and d’Alonzo type II or III fracture (n = 47) were fixated with either two conventional cannulated screws or with a single bone allograft screw. The constructs were biomechanically tested to failure in the same fashion as in their intact state. Stiffness, yield, and ultimate load were evaluated. The results were adjusted by age, sex, volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), and the cross-sectional area ratio of cortical bone to total bone measured at the junction of the odontoid process with the vertebral body (Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar).

Results

Stiffness, yield and ultimate load were restored in the cannulated screws group by 44 ± 10%, 46 ± 7%, and 46 ± 5% and in the bone allograft group by 50 ± 12%, 30 ± 9%, and 34 ± 6% (mean ± SE). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding the three mechanical outcomes (0.104 ≤ p ≤ 0.223). Positive significant relation was found between vBMD and stiffness in each group (0.248 ≤ R²≤0.273, 0.018 ≤ p ≤ 0.038), as well as between Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar and stiffness (R²=0.218, p = 0.033), vBMD and ultimate load (R²=0.430, p = 0.001) and ultimate loadand vBMD (R²=0.315, p = 0.010) in the cannulated screws group.

Conclusions

The primary stability of odontoid fracture fixation is determined mainly by the quality of the local bone and independent of the fixation technique. From the biomechanical perspective, the lower mean values for the yield and ultimate load restored in the bone allograft group compared to the cannulated screws group should be compensated by lower peak load during the patient’s rehabilitation process.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
同种异体骨移植螺钉与空心螺钉的对比:一项生物力学研究
引言蝶骨骨折的不愈合率高、治疗难度大、螺钉相关并发症的发生率高。本研究的目的是比较单个生物结合骨异体螺钉与两个传统插管螺钉用于蝶骨骨折固定的生物力学能力。对安德森和达隆佐 II 型或 III 型骨折的标本(n = 47)使用两根传统的套管螺钉或一根同种异体骨螺钉进行固定。以与完整状态相同的方式对构建物进行了生物力学失效测试。对刚度、屈服和极限负荷进行了评估。结果插管螺钉组的刚度、屈服度和极限负荷分别恢复了 44 ± 10%、46 ± 7% 和 46 ± 5%,而骨异体移植组分别恢复了 50 ± 12%、30 ± 9% 和 34 ± 6%(平均值 ± SE)。各组之间在三种力学结果上没有明显差异(0.104 ≤ p ≤ 0.223)。各组的 vBMD 和僵硬度(0.248 ≤ R²≤0.273, 0.018 ≤ p ≤ 0.038)、Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar 和僵硬度(R²=0.218,p = 0.033)、vBMD 和极限负荷(R²=0.430,p = 0.结论蝶骨骨折固定的主要稳定性主要由局部骨质决定,与固定技术无关。从生物力学的角度来看,骨同种异体移植组恢复的屈服力和极限载荷的平均值低于插管螺钉组,但在患者康复过程中,应能以较低的峰值载荷来补偿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
424
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is a rich source of instruction and information for physicians in clinical practice and research in the extensive field of orthopaedics and traumatology. The journal publishes papers that deal with diseases and injuries of the musculoskeletal system from all fields and aspects of medicine. The journal is particularly interested in papers that satisfy the information needs of orthopaedic clinicians and practitioners. The journal places special emphasis on clinical relevance. "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is the official journal of the German Speaking Arthroscopy Association (AGA).
期刊最新文献
Retrospective study of mechanical complications after cephalomedullary nail implantation from 2019 to 2024 following per-, sub- or intertrochanteric femur fractures Pediatric shoulder instability: epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis and treatment Diagnostic familiarity with osteochondroma among primary physicians: a retrospective analysis of 195 referred cases Outcomes of internal fixation for pediatric proximal femoral fractures using a 3.5 mm T-plate Vancouver B3 periprosthetic fractures of the femur: options for treatment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1