Comparison of different fixation methods of bicolumnar acetabular fractures
Tamás Bodzay1, Gergely Sztrinkai1, András Kocsis1, Báliinstnt Kozma2, Tamás Gál3, Károly Váradi2
1Trauma Centre, Péterfy Hospital, Budapest, Hungary
2Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Machine Design, Budapest, Hungary
3Department of Trauma, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
Keywords: Acetabular fracture; cranial plate; iliac wing fracture; medial plate; quadrilateral surface plate.
Objectives: This study aims to investigate if the stabilization of iliac wing fractures influences the stability of the acetabular osteosynthesis, if surgical fixation is the choice of treatment, and which technique to be used. Materials and methods: In the study, measurements were performed with an improved finite element model. Tension and displacement values were measured in bicolumnar acetabular fractures in the following cases: combination of cranial and medial plate fixation through the linea terminalis, or combination of cranial plate and quadrilateral surface plates. The iliac wing fracture was either not fixed, or fixed with screws or with a plate.
Results: In cases where osteosynthesis was performed through the linea terminalis, 0.01 mm fracture gap displacement was observed with the use of a combination of cranial and quadrilateral surface plate fixations. In the combination of cranial and medial positioned plates, the displacement in the fracture gap was 0.088 mm. The fixation of the iliac wing fracture did not improve the stability of the osteosynthesis of the linea terminalis. Plate fixation of the iliac wing fracture was more stable than screw fixation alone.
Conclusion: In double column fractures, if the reduction does not require an anterior approach, it is not necessary to fix the iliac wing fracture only to improve the stability of the fixation. If the reduction does require an anterior approach, it is worth fixing the iliac wing fracture with the technically less demanding screw fixation.