scholarly journals Comparison of Biomechanical Performance of Five Different Treatment Approaches for Fixing Posterior Pelvic Ring Injury

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Yongtao Lu ◽  
Yiqian He ◽  
Weiteng Li ◽  
Zhuoyue Yang ◽  
Ruifei Peng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Pelvic Ring ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Fixation Method ◽  
Pelvic Ring Injury ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring ◽  
Triangular Osteosynthesis ◽  
Pelvic Injuries ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring Injury

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).

Robot-assisted S2 screw fixation for posterior pelvic ring injury

Injury ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junqiang Wang ◽  
Teng Zhang ◽  
Wei Han ◽  
KeHan Hua ◽  
Xinbao Wu
Keyword(s):  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Pelvic Ring ◽  
Pelvic Ring Injury ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring Injury

scholarly journals Posterior pelvic ring injury of straddle fractures: Incidence, fixation methods, and clinical outcomes

2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-65
Author(s):  
Yong-Cheol Yoon ◽  
Dae Sung Ma ◽  
Seung Kwan Lee ◽  
Jong-Keon Oh ◽  
Hyung Keun Song
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Pelvic Ring ◽  
Pelvic Ring Injury ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring ◽  
Fixation Methods ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring Injury

scholarly journals Preoperative CT Simulation of Iliosacral Screws for Treating Unstable Posterior Pelvic Ring Injury

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peishuai Zhao ◽  
Xiaopan Wang ◽  
Xiaotian Chen ◽  
Jianzhong Guan ◽  
Min Wu
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Exposure Time ◽  
Pelvic Ring ◽  
Pelvic Ring Injury ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring ◽  
Iliosacral Screws ◽  
Preoperative Ct ◽  
Ct Simulation ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring Injury

Abstract BackgroundPercutaneous iliosacral screw placement is an important surgical method for the treatment of pelvic unstable fractures, but either intraoperative X-ray screws or navigational screws may be misplaced. This study aimed to demonstrate a safe, effective, and rapid medthod for placing iliosacral screws for the treatment of unstable posterior pelvic ring injury according to preoperative computed tomography (CT) planning using simulated screws. MethodsAfter preoperative CT simulation of iliosacral screws planning screw insertion point and trajectory, intraoperative percutaneous iliosacral screws were used to treat unstable pelvic posterior ring injury.The mechanism of injury, Tile classification, number of screw implants, operative time of each screw implantation, radiation exposure time of each screw implantation screw position, complications, and postoperative follow-up time were collected.Screw position grading was evaluated by Smith grading. ResultsA total of 24 screws were implanted in 21 patients (9 men and 12 women;mean age 41.3 years:range 14-71 years). Tile classification included:Tile B:15 patients;Tile C:6 patients. The mean placement time of each screw was 19.5 minutes (range 14-32min); Radiation exposure time: 0.6 min (range 0.5-0.9min); Two screws were inserted in 3 patients; One screw was inserted in 18 patients; According to Smith grading standard, grade0:20 cases; and Grade1:1 case; Mean postoperative follow-up time was 17.1months (range12-25 months); None of the patients showed nonunion. ConclusionsPreoperative CT simulation of iliosacral screws for placement planning, screw trajectory, and intraoperative placement of screws is a safe method that can be used to reduce surgical time, radiation exposure, and accurate screw placement.

scholarly journals Plate fixation of the anterior pelvic ring in patients with fragility fractures of the pelvis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michiel Herteleer ◽  
Mehdi Boudissa ◽  
Alexander Hofmann ◽  
Daniel Wagner ◽  
Pol Maria Rommens
Keyword(s):  
Pelvic Ring ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Weight Bearing ◽  
Fragility Fractures ◽  
Pubic Symphysis ◽  
Osteoporotic Bone ◽  
Screw Loosening ◽  
Posterior Pelvic Ring ◽  
Pelvic Brim

Abstract Introduction In fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP), fractures of the posterior pelvic ring are nearly always combined with fractures of the anterior pelvic ring. When a surgical stabilization of the posterior pelvis is performed, a stabilization of the anterior pelvis is recommended as well. In this study, we aim at finding out whether conventional plate osteosynthesis is a valid option in patients with osteoporotic bone. Materials and methods We retrospectively reviewed medical charts and radiographs of all patients with a FFP, who underwent a plate osteosynthesis of the anterior pelvic ring between 2009 and 2019. Patient demographics, fracture characteristics, properties of the osteosynthesis, complications and revision surgeries were documented. Single plate osteosynthesis (SPO) at the pelvic brim was compared with double plate osteosynthesis (DPO) with one plate at the pelvic brim and one plate anteriorly. We hypothesized that the number and severity of screw loosening (SL) or plate breakage in DPO are lower than in SPO. Results 48 patients with a mean age of 76.8 years were reviewed. In 37 cases, SPO was performed, in 11 cases DPO. Eight out of 11 DPO were performed in patients with FFP type III or FFP type IV. We performed significantly more DPO when the instability was located at the level of the pubic symphysis (p = 0.025). More patients with a chronic FFP (surgery more than one month after diagnosis) were treated with DPO (p = 0.07). Infra-acetabular screws were more often inserted in DPO (p = 0.056). Screw loosening (SL) was seen in the superior plate in 45% of patients. There was no SL in the anterior plate. There was SL in 19 of 37 patients with SPO and in 3 of 11 patients with DPO (p = 0.16). SL was localized near to the pubic symphysis in 19 of 22 patients after SPO and in all three patients after DPO. There was no SL in DPO within the first month postoperatively. We performed revision osteosynthesis in six patients (6/48), all belonged to the SPO group (6/37). The presence of a bone defect, unilateral or bilateral anterior pelvic ring fracture, post-operative weight-bearing restrictions, osteosynthesis of the posterior pelvic ring, and the presence of infra- or supra-acetabular screws did not significantly influence screw loosening in SPO or DPO. Conclusion There is a high rate of SL in plate fixation of the anterior pelvic ring in FFP. In the vast majority, SL is located near to the pubic symphysis. DPO is associated with a lower rate of SL, less severe SL and a later onset of SL. Revision surgery is less likely in DPO. In FFP, we recommend DPO instead of SPO for fixation of fractures of the anterior pelvic ring, which are located in or near to the pubic symphysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document