Abstract
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
To determine if force measured using a strain gauge in circular external fixation frames is different for 1) different simulated stages of bone healing, and for 2) fractures clinically deemed either united or un-united.
METHODS
In a laboratory study, 3 similar Ilizarov frame constructs were assembled using a Perspex bone analogue. Constructs were tested in 10 different clinical situations simulating different stages of bone healing including with the bone analogue intact, with 1,3 and 50mm gaps, and with 6 materials of varying stiffness's within the 50mm gap. A Bluetooth strain gauge was inserted across the simulated fracture focus, replacing one of the 4 threaded rods used to construct the frame. Constructs were loaded to 700N using an Instron testing machine and maximum force during loading was measured by the strain gauge. Testing was repeated with the strain gauge replacing each of the 4 threaded rods in turn, with measurements being repeated 3 times, across all 3 frame constructs for all 10 simulated clinical situations (n=360). Force measurements between the situations were compared using a Kruskal-Wallis test (KW) and a post-hoc Steel test was used for multiple comparison against control (intact bone model). Additionally, a pilot study has been initiated to assess clinical efficacy of the strain gauge measurement in patients with circular frames. The strain gauge replaced the anterior rod across the fracture focus for each patient. Patients were asked to step on a weighing scale with their affected limb, and maximum weight transfer through the limb and maximal force measured in the frame were recorded. This was repeated 3 times and a mean ratio of force to weight through affected limb was calculated for each patient. The clinical situation at each measurement was designated as united or un-united by one of the senior authors for analysis. Force measurements between the situations were compared using a Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test.
RESULTS
In the laboratory study, including all constructs with the strain gauge in all positions, a statistically significant relationship between model stability and force measured was identified (KW test for overall relationship p<0.0001). The largest force was measured in the model with a 50mm gap (median 170N, IQR 155–192, range 83–213) and the smallest in the intact bone model (median 3N, IQR 1–8, range 0–11). Multiple comparison testing found a significant difference between intact bone and all the unstable situations (p=0.002 or better). Examining initial results from our pilot clinical study, nine measurements were available in seven patients. Three of these were taken in patients with fractures yet to unite, six in patients where union has since been confirmed clinically. The median force measured was significantly greater where the fracture was not united (median 1.66 N/kg, range 1.07–1.99 vs 0.12 N/kg, range 0.05–0.73, p=0.02).
CONCLUSIONS
This laboratory study demonstrates that force measurement may be different at different stages of healing, and although only limited data was available, a pilot clinical study showed a significant relationship between the force measured and clinical union of the patient's fracture.
Declaration of Interest
(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.
