ArticleJournal of orthopaedic translation2020
Periprosthetic fracture fixation in Vancouver B1 femoral shaft fractures: A biomechanical study comparing two plate systems.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The race for the classification of proximal periprosthetic femoral fractures : Vancouver vs Unified Classification System (UCS) - a systematic review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Pooled it
- Ortho-bridge system for the treatment of Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fractures based on three dimensional printing.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Cementless long-stem fixation in periprosthetic clamshell fracture: a biomechanical investigation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- [Concept for the treatment of periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Biomechanical comparison of the femoral neck system and the dynamic hip screw in basicervical femoral neck fractures.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Peri- and Interprosthetic Femoral Fractures-Current Concepts and New Developments for Internal Fixation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- LOQTEQJournal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- A New System for Periprosthetic Fracture Stabilization-A Biomechanical Comparison.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Innovative designs and procedures for fracture fixation and soft tissue repair.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPeriprosthetic fractures of the femur are an increasing problem in today's trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Owing to the hip stem, implant anchorage is very difficult in the proximal femur. This study compares two plate systems regarding their biomechanical properties and the handling in periprosthetic fracture fixation of the proximal femur. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing eight pairs of fresh, frozen human proximal femora the Locking Compression Plate/Locking Attachment Plate construct (LCP/LAP) (group I, DePuy Synthes) was compared to the new LOQTEQ® periprosthetic distal lateral femur plate (group II, AAP Implantate AG). After implantation of press fit femoral hip stems a Vancouver B1 fracture model was used. Biomechanical testing was performed by cyclic axial loading with a constant increment of 0.1 N/cycle starting from 750 N axial loading. Every 250 cycles an a.p. x-ray was done to evaluate failure.
resultsThe Group II showed significant higher axial stiffness (+42%) compared with Group I. In addition, Group II withstood significantly more load-cycles until failure (20%). The mode of catastrophic failure was plate breakage in Group II, whereas, in Group I, all plates showed an early bending followed by plate breakage. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionBoth plate systems enable screw placement around hip stems. The hinge plate showed superior biomechanical results compared with the locking compression plate/locking attachment plate construct. Furthermore, the hinge plate offers variable hinges and variable angel locking making bicortical screw placement around hip stems more comfortable and safe. THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE: The results of this study can be directly transferred to patient care. With the innovative hinge plate, the surgeon has a biomechanically superior implant, which also offers improved options for screw placement compared to a standard locking plate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.