header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

100 – A BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF LAG SCREW POSITION IN THE FEMORAL HEAD FOR CEPHALOMEDULLARY NAILS USED TO FIX UNSTABLE PERITROCHANTERIC FRACTURES



Abstract

Purpose: Minimizing tip-apex distance (TAD) has been shown to reduce clinical failure of extramedullary sliding hip screws used to fix peritrochanteric fractures. There is debate regarding the optimal position of the lag screw in the femoral head when a cephalomedullary nail is used to treat a peritrochanteric fracture. Some authors suggest the TAD should be minimized as with an extramedullary sliding hip screw, while others suggest the lag screw should be placed inferior within the femoral head. The primary goal of this study was to determine which of 5 possible lag screw positions in the femoral head provides greatest mechanical stiffness and/or load-to-failure for an unstable peritrochanteric fracture treated with a cepha-clomedullary nail. The secondary goal was to determine if there is a linear correlation between implant-femur mechanical stiffness and/or load to failure (dependent variables) with a series of five radiographic measurements (independent variables) of distance from the lag screw tip to the femoral head apex.

Method: Long Gamma 3 Nails (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ) were inserted into 30 left synthetic femurs (Pacific Research Laboratories, Vashon, WA). An unstable four-part fracture was created, anatomically reduced, and repaired using one of 5 lag screw placements in the femoral head:

  1. superior (n=6),

  2. inferior (n=6),

  3. anterior (n=6),

  4. posterior (n=6),

  5. central (n=6).

All specimens were radiographed in the anterioposterior and lateral planes, and radiographic measurements including TAD and a calcar referenced tip-apex distance (CalTAD) were calculated. All specimens were tested for axial, lateral, and torsional stiffness, and then loaded-to-failure in the axial position using an Instron 8874 (Canton, MA). ANOVA was used to compare means of the five treatment groups. Linear regression analysis was used to compare stiffness and load-to-failure (dependant variables) with radiographic measurements (independent variables). A post hoc power analysis was performed.

Results: The inferior lag screw position had significantly greater mean axial stiffness than superior (p< 0.01), anterior (p=0.02) and posterior (p=0.04) positions. Analysis revealed significantly less mean torsional stiffness for the superior lag screw position compared to other lag screw positions (p< 0.01 all 4 pairings). No statistical differences were noted for lateral stiffness. Superior and central lag screw positions had significantly greater mean load-to-failure than anterior (p< 0.01 and p=0.02) and posterior (p< 0.01 and p=0.05) positions.

There were significant negative linear correlations between stiffness tests with CalTAD, and load-to-failure with TAD. Power was greater than 95% for axial stiffness, torsional stiffness and load-to-failure tests.

Conclusion: Position of the lag screw in the femoral head affects the biomechanical properties of the implant-femur construct. Central placement of the lag screw with minimization of TAD may provide the best combination of stiffness and load-to-failure.

Correspondence should be addressed to: COA, 4150 Ste. Catherine St. West Suite 360, Westmount, QC H3Z 2Y5, Canada. Email: meetings@canorth.org