The infraacetabular screw versus the antegrade posterior column screw in acetabulum fractures with posterior column involvement: a biomechanical comparison

Nico Hinz, Dirk Baumeister (Co-author), Julius Dehoust, Matthias Münch, Karl-Heinz Frosch, Peter Augat (Co-author), Maximilian J Hartel

Research output: Contribution to journalOriginal Articlepeer-review

2 Citations (Web of Science)

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Traditionally, plate osteosynthesis of the anterior column combined with an antegrade posterior column screw is used for fixation of anterior column plus posterior hemitransverse (ACPHT) acetabulum fractures. Replacing the posterior column screw with an infraacetabular screw could improve the straightforwardness of acetabulum surgery, as it can be inserted using less invasive approaches, such as the AIP/Stoppa approach, which is a well-established standard approach. However, the biomechanical stability of a plate osteosynthesis combined with an infraacetabular screw instead of an antegrade posterior column screw is unknown.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two osteosynthesis constructs were compared in a synthetic hemipelvis model with an ACPHT fracture: Suprapectineal plate + antegrade posterior column screw (APCS group) vs. suprapectineal plate + infraacetabular screw (IAS group). A single-leg stance test protocol with an additional passive muscle force and a cyclic loading of 32,000 cycles with a maximum effective load of 2400 N was applied. Interfragmentary motion and rotation of the three main fracture lines were measured.

RESULTS: At the posterior hemitransverse fracture line, interfragmentary motion perpendicular to the fracture line (p < 0.001) and shear motion (p < 0.001) and at the high anterior column fracture line, interfragmentary motion longitudinal to the fracture line (p = 0.017) were significantly higher in the IAS group than in the APCS group. On the other hand, interfragmentary motion perpendicular (p = 0.004), longitudinal (p < 0.001) and horizontal to the fracture line (p = 0.004) and shear motion (p < 0.001) were significantly increased at the low anterior column fracture line in the APCS group compared to the IAS group.

CONCLUSIONS: Replacing the antegrade posterior column screw with an infraacetabular screw is not recommendable as it results in an increased interfragmentary motion, especially at the posterior hemitransverse component of an ACPHT fracture.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2573-2582
Number of pages10
JournalARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY
Volume144
Issue number6
Early online dateApr 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2024

Keywords

  • Acetabulum fracture
  • Antegrade posterior column screw
  • Anterior column plus posterior hemitransverse fracture
  • Biomechanical testing
  • Infraacetabular screw
  • Suprapectineal plate

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The infraacetabular screw versus the antegrade posterior column screw in acetabulum fractures with posterior column involvement: a biomechanical comparison'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this