Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
3 result(s) for "Skulev, Hristo Kostov"
Sort by:
Antegrade anterior column acetabulum fracture fixation with cannulated compression headless screws—A biomechanical study on standardized osteoporotic artificial bone
Due to the increase in life expectancy and high-energy traumas, anterior column acetabular fractures (ACFs) are also increasing. While open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is still the standard surgical procedure, minimally invasive, percutaneous fixation of osteoporotic acetabulum fractures (AF) are growing in popularity. The aim of this biomechanical study was to evaluate the biomechanical competence following antegrade fixation with a standard screw versus a cannulated compression headless screw. Eight anatomical osteoporotic composite pelvises were given an anterior column fracture. Two groups of eight specimens each (n = 8) for fixation with either a 6.5 mm cannulated compression headless screw in group Anterior Acetabulum Canulated Compression Headless Screw (AACCH), or with a 6.5 mm partially threaded cannulated screw in group Anterior Acetabulum Standard Screw (AASS) where compared. Each specimen was biomechanically loaded cyclically at a rate of 2 Hz with monotonically increasing compressive load until failure. Motions were assessed by means of optical motion tracking. Initial construct stiffness trended higher in group AACCH at 152.4 ± 23.1 N/mm compared to group AASS at 118.5 ± 34.3 N/mm, p = 0.051. Numbers of cycles and corresponding peak load at failure, were significantly higher in group AACCH at 6734 ± 1669 cycles and 873.4 ± 166.9 N versus group AASS at 4440 ± 2063 cycles and 644.0 ± 206.3 N, p = 0.041. Failure modes were breakout of the screws around the proximal entry point. From a biomechanical perspective, group AACCH was associated with superior biomechanical competence compared to standard partially threaded cannulated screws and could therefore be considered as valid alternative for fixation of anterior acetabulum fractures.
Helical Plating Compared with Straight Plating and Nailing for Treatment of Proximal Third Humeral Shaft Fractures—A Biomechanical Study
Background and Objectives: The surgical treatment of proximal humeral shaft fractures usually considers application of either long straight plates or intramedullary nails. By being able to spare the rotator cuff and avoid the radial nerve distally, the implementation of helical plates might overcome the downsides of common fixation methods. The aims of the current study were (1) to explore the biomechanical competence of different plate designs and (2) to compare their performance versus the alternative treatment option of using intramedullary nails. Materials and Methods: Twenty-four artificial humeri were assigned to the following four groups for simulation of an unstable proximal humeral shaft fracture and instrumentation: Group 1 (Straight-PHILOS), Group 2 (MULTILOC-Nail), Group 3 (45°-Helical-PHILOS), and Group 4 (90°-Helical-PHILOS). All specimens underwent non-destructive, quasi-static biomechanical testing under loading in axial compression, torsion in internal/external rotation, and pure bending in four directions, accompanied by motion tracking. Results: Axial stiffness/displacement in Group 2 was significantly higher/smaller than in all other groups (p ≤ 0.010). Torsional displacement in Group 2 was significantly bigger than in all other groups (p ≤ 0.017). Significantly smaller coronal plane displacement was identified in Group 2 versus all other groups (p < 0.001) and in Group 4 versus Group 1 (p = 0.022). Significantly bigger sagittal plane displacement was detected in Group 4 versus all other groups (p ≤ 0.024) and in Group 1 versus Group 2 (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Intramedullary nails demonstrated higher axial stiffness and smaller axial interfragmentary movements compared with all investigated plate designs. However, they were associated with bigger torsional movements at the fracture site. Although 90°-helical plates revealed bigger interfragmentary movements in the sagittal plane, they demonstrated improved resistance against displacements in the coronal plane when compared with straight lateral plates. In addition, 45°-helical plates manifested similar biomechanical competence to straight plates and may be considered a valid alternative to the latter from a biomechanical standpoint.
Antegrade Posterior Column Acetabulum Fracture Screw Fixation via Posterior Approach: A Biomechanical Comparative Study
Background and Objectives: Minimally invasive surgeries for acetabulum fracture fixation are gaining popularity due to their known advantages versus open reduction and internal fixation. Antegrade or retrograde screw fixation along the long axis of the posterior column of the acetabulum is increasingly applied in surgical practice. While there is sufficient justification in the literature for the application of the anterior approach, there is a deficit of reports related to the posterior approach. The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical competence of posterior column acetabulum fracture fixation through antegrade screw placement using either a standard cannulated screw or a cannulated compression headless screw (CCHS) via posterior approach. Materials and Methods: Eight composite pelvises were used, and a posterior column acetabulum fracture according to the Letournel Classification was simulated on both their left and right sides via an osteotomy. The sixteen hemi-pelvic specimens were assigned to two groups (n = 8) for either posterior column standard screw (group PCSS) or posterior column CCHS (group PCCH) fixation. Biomechanical testing was performed by applying steadily increased cyclic load until failure. Interfragmentary movements were investigated by means of motion tracking. Results: Initial stiffness demonstrated significantly higher values in PCCH (163.1 ± 14.9 N/mm) versus PCSS (133.1 ± 27.5 N/mm), p = 0.024. Similarly, cycles and load at failure were significantly higher in PCCH (7176.7 ± 2057.0 and 917.7 ± 205.7 N) versus PCSS (3661.8 ± 1664.5 and 566.2 ± 166.5 N), p = 0.002. Conclusion: From a biomechanical perspective, CCHS fixation demonstrates superior stability and could be a valuable alternative option to the standard cannulated screw fixation of posterior column acetabulum fractures, thus increasing the confidence in postoperative full weight bearing for both the patient and treating surgeon. Whether uneventful immediate postoperative full weight bearing can be achieved with CCHS fixation should primarily be investigated in further human cadaveric studies with a larger sample size.