Mechanical evaluation of the effect of the rod to rod distance on the stiffness of uniplanar external fixator frames.

Q1 Medicine MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-08 DOI:10.1007/s12306-023-00782-1
B Pourabbas, J Emad, J Dehghani, S Heidari, A R Vosoughi
{"title":"Mechanical evaluation of the effect of the rod to rod distance on the stiffness of uniplanar external fixator frames.","authors":"B Pourabbas, J Emad, J Dehghani, S Heidari, A R Vosoughi","doi":"10.1007/s12306-023-00782-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the effect of the rod-to-rod distance on the mechanical stability of single-rod and double-rod external fixator frames.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> Four different constructs, one single-rod and three double-rod constructs with different rod-rod distances, were subjected to the axial, bending, and torsional forces. The stiffness of different configurations was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Single-rod configuration had statistically the lowest stiffness when subjected to the axial, bending, and torsional forces. Maximum stiffness against the axial and anterior-posterior bending forces was achieved when the rod-rod distance was adjusted to 50 mm (halfway between the first rod and the end of the Schanz pins). There was no statistically significant difference in lateral bending stiffness among different double-rod configurations (p value: 0.435). The maximum stiffness against torsional forces was achieved when the rod-rod distance was adjusted to 100 mm (the second rod at the end of the Schanz pins).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Double-rod uniplanar external fixator frames are significantly stiffer than the single-rod constructs, and however, the rod-rod distance can significantly affect the construct stiffness. We found that a frame with 50 mm rod-rod distance was the optimum fixator among tested configurations that allowed a balance between axial, bending, and torsional stiffness of the construct.</p>","PeriodicalId":18875,"journal":{"name":"MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY","volume":" ","pages":"397-403"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-023-00782-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the effect of the rod-to-rod distance on the mechanical stability of single-rod and double-rod external fixator frames.

Methods:  Four different constructs, one single-rod and three double-rod constructs with different rod-rod distances, were subjected to the axial, bending, and torsional forces. The stiffness of different configurations was calculated.

Results:  Single-rod configuration had statistically the lowest stiffness when subjected to the axial, bending, and torsional forces. Maximum stiffness against the axial and anterior-posterior bending forces was achieved when the rod-rod distance was adjusted to 50 mm (halfway between the first rod and the end of the Schanz pins). There was no statistically significant difference in lateral bending stiffness among different double-rod configurations (p value: 0.435). The maximum stiffness against torsional forces was achieved when the rod-rod distance was adjusted to 100 mm (the second rod at the end of the Schanz pins).

Conclusion:  Double-rod uniplanar external fixator frames are significantly stiffer than the single-rod constructs, and however, the rod-rod distance can significantly affect the construct stiffness. We found that a frame with 50 mm rod-rod distance was the optimum fixator among tested configurations that allowed a balance between axial, bending, and torsional stiffness of the construct.

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
杆与杆之间的距离对单面外固定架刚度影响的力学评估。
目的:研究杆对杆距离对单杆和双杆外固定架机械稳定性的影响: 对四种不同的结构(一种单杆结构和三种具有不同杆距的双杆结构)施加轴向力、弯曲力和扭转力。计算了不同结构的刚度: 据统计,单杆结构在承受轴向力、弯曲力和扭转力时的刚度最小。当杆与杆之间的距离调整到 50 毫米(第一根杆与 Schanz 销钉末端之间的中点)时,轴向力和前后弯曲力的刚度最大。不同双杆配置的横向弯曲刚度在统计学上没有明显差异(P 值:0.435)。当杆-杆间距调整到 100 毫米(第二根杆位于 Schanz 销钉的末端)时,抗扭转力的刚度最大: 结论:双杆单平面外固定架的刚度明显高于单杆结构,但杆-杆间距会对结构刚度产生显著影响。我们发现,在测试过的结构中,杆-杆间距为 50 毫米的框架是最理想的固定器,它能使结构的轴向、弯曲和扭转刚度达到平衡。
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
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Surgery – Formerly La Chirurgia degli Organi di Movimento, founded in 1917 at the Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, is a peer-reviewed journal published three times a year. The journal provides up-to-date information to clinicians and scientists through the publication of original papers, reviews, case reports, and brief communications dealing with the pathogenesis and treatment of orthopaedic conditions.An electronic version is also available at http://www.springerlink.com.The journal is open for publication of supplements and for publishing abstracts of scientific meetings; conditions can be obtained from the Editors-in-Chief or the Publisher.
期刊最新文献
To cast or not to cast? Postoperative care of ankle fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Use of calcaneal locking plate in surgical treatment of quadrilateral plate fractures of the acetabulum. Role of tranexamic acid in reducing peri-operative blood loss in open spine surgeries. Magnum metal-on-metal uncemented total hip replacement: 8- to 18-year outcomes of 211 cases. Oxidised cellulose in musculoskeletal oncology procedure: Does it reduce postoperative blood loss?
×
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:481959085
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