PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11415819

Stability of external circular fixation: a multi-variable biomechanical analysis.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine how the manipulation of the parameters of fixation and components of the circular external frame could improve and maintain optimal stability of bone fragments. DESIGN: We performed a multi-parametric biomechanical analysis of the extrinsic parameters effecting bone fragment stabilization. Results of testing are presented as a percent change in stiffness due to the manipulation of frame components and their interaction with other fixation parameters. BACKGROUND: Although there have been investigations of the biomechanical characteristics of circular external fixation, they have been limited to either individual frame components or full frame comparisons. Therefore, these studies did not provide a comprehensive understanding of how the manipulation of circular fixator components influences bone fragment stability. METHODS: Mechanical testing was performed in three phases examining the effect of numerous components including ring diameter, wire angle, ring separation, etc. on axial, torsional and bending stiffness. RESULTS: For phase I (single ring) and phase II (double-ring block), ring diameter was the most significant factor affecting axial and torsional stiffness, while wire angle, ring separation, and their interaction had the most influence on bending stiffness. Phase III (two double-ring blocks) showed that ring positioning with respect to the osteotomy site had the most affect on bending and torsional stiffness while axial stiffness was non-linear and dependent upon the applied load. CONCLUSIONS: The stability of bone fragments within a circular external fixator is affected by manipulation of the parameters of fixation or individual components of the frame. The contribution of each component to overall bone fragment stability is dependent upon the mode of loading. The changes in overall stability of bone fragments are dependent not only on the individual frame components but also upon their interaction with other parameters of fixation. RELEVANCE: Understanding how the manipulation of individual frame components will affect overall bone fragment stabilization will allow the surgeon to better control the stability of bone fragments for each clinical situation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Dwight G. Bronson, Mikhail L. Samchukov, John G. Birch, Richard H. Browne, Richard B. Ashman. 1998. Stability of external circular fixation: a multi-variable biomechanical analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0268-0033(98)00007-2

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗