Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38071686›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2024

Comparative study of mechanical performance of various fixation constructs in multifragmentary distal humeral shaft fracture: a finite element analysis.

Surasak Jitprapaikulsarn, Nattapon Chantarapanich, Theerachai Apivatthakakul, Arthit Gromprasit, Pasin Lertvilai, Kritsada Sukha, Sujin Wanchat, Chantas Mahaisavariya

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Surasak JitprapaikulsarnDepartment of Orthopedics, Buddhachinaraj Hospital, Phitsanulok, Thailand.
Nattapon ChantarapanichDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering at Sriracha, Kasetsart University, Sriracha, Chonburi, Thailand. nattapon@eng.src.ku.ac.th.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1386-5885
Theerachai ApivatthakakulDepartment of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Arthit GromprasitDepartment of Orthopedics, Buddhachinaraj Hospital, Phitsanulok, Thailand.
Pasin LertvilaiDepartment of Orthopedics, Buddhachinaraj Hospital, Phitsanulok, Thailand.
Kritsada SukhaDepartment of Orthopedics, Buddhachinaraj Hospital, Phitsanulok, Thailand.
Sujin WanchatDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering at Sriracha, Kasetsart University, Sriracha, Chonburi, Thailand.
Chantas MahaisavariyaGolden Jubilee Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Buddhachinaraj Hospital · THKasetsart University · THChiang Mai University · THSiriraj Hospital · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been no scientific mechanical assessment demonstrating the optimal fixation technique in multifragmentary fractures of the distal humeral shaft. The purpose of the present study was to compare the biomechanical performance of 5 fixation constructs as used in minimally invasive plating osteosynthesis (MIPO) for distal humeral shaft fractures.

methodsThree-dimensional (3D) humerus model with 20 mm distal humeral shaft fracture gap simulating multifragmentary fracture was created from computed tomography data and virtually fixed by 5 fixation techniques as MIPO, i.e., anterior narrow dynamic compression plate (DCP), anterior narrow locking compression plate (LCP), anterior reversed proximal humeral internal locking system (R-PHILOS), extra-articular distal humerus locking compression plate (LCP-EADH), and anteromedial LCP. All constructs were biomechanically tested under 6 loading conditions by means of finite element analysis, i.e., 250-N axial compression, 7.5-N m internal rotation, 7.5-N m external rotation, 10-N m posterior bending, 10-N m valgus rotation, and 10-N m varus rotation. In addition, A 3D model of each construct was fabricated as 3D printed models. Fixations were applied to the 3D printing model which were later mechanically tested to validate the FE results.

resultsEQV stress exhibited on anterior narrow LCP and anterior R-PHILOS were comparable which were lower than other constructs under axial compression and valgus-varus bending. Anterior R-PHILOS produced lower EQV stress than other constructs under internal-external rotation and posterior bending. On the whole, R-PHILOS demonstrated a comparable fracture displacement to those LCP with anterior or anteromedial approaches, that achieved the lowest displacement values. In addition, the experimental mechanical test values shared a correlation with the FE model results.

conclusionOverall, the anterior R-PHILOS was considered as a potential candidate for multifragmentary distal humeral shaft fractures. It demonstrated efficacious biomechanical performance in terms of implant stress and distal fragment displacement.

Indexed as

Humeral FracturesBiomechanical PhenomenaBone PlatesFinite Element AnalysisFracture Fixation, InternalHumansHumerusDistal humeral shaft fractureFinite element studyFixationLCP-EADHNarrow DCPNarrow LCPReversed PHILOS

Identifiers

PMID38071686
OpenAlexW4389515694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.