Odontoid fracture of the second cervical vertebra (C2) is the most common spinal fracture type in elderly patients. However, very little is known about the biomechanical fracture mechanisms, but could play a role in fracture prevention and treatment. This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical competence and fracture characteristics of the odontoid process.

A total of 42 human C2 specimens (14 female and 28 male, 71.5 ± 6.5 years) were scanned via quantitative computed tomography, divided in 6 groups (n = 7) and subjected to combined quasi-static loading at a rate of 0.1 mm/s until fracturing at inclinations of −15°, 0° and 15° in sagittal plane, and −50° and 0° in transverse plane. Bone mineral density (BMD), specimen height, fusion state of the ossification centers, stiffness, yield load, ultimate load, and fracture type according to Anderson and d'Alonzo were assessed.

While the lowest values for stiffness, yield, and ultimate load were observed at load inclination of 15° in sagittal plane, no statistically significant differences could be observed among the six groups (p = 0.235, p = 0.646, and p = 0.505, respectively). Evaluating specimens with only clearly distinguishable fusion of the ossification centers (n = 26) reveled even less differences among the groups for all mechanical parameters. BMD was positively correlated with yield load (R² = 0.350, p < 0.001), and ultimate load (R² = 0.955, p < 0.001), but not with stiffness (p = 0.070). Type III was the most common fracture type (23.5%).

These biomechanical outcomes indicate that load direction plays a subordinate role in traumatic fractures of the odontoid process in contrast to BMD which is a strong determinant of stiffness and strength. Thus, odontoid fractures appear to result from an interaction between load magnitude and bone quality.

The lateral wall thickness (LWT) in trochanteric femoral fractures is a known predictive factor for postoperative fracture stability. Currently, the AO/OTA classification uses a patient non-specific measure to assess the absolute LWT (aLWT) and distinguish stable A1.3 from unstable A2.1 fractures based on a threshold of 20.5 mm. This approach potentially results in interpatient deviations due to different bone morphologies and consequently variations in fracture stability. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore whether a patient-specific measure for assessment of the relative LWT (rLWT) results in a more precise threshold for prediction of unstable fractures.

Part 1 of the study evaluated 146 pelvic radiographs to assess left-right symmetry with regard to caput-collum-angle (CCD) and total trochanteric thickness (TTT), and used the results to establish the rLWT measurement technique. Part 2 reevaluated 202 patients from a previous study cohort to analyze their rLWT versus aLWT for optimization purposes.

Findings in Part 1 demonstrated a bilateral symmetry of the femur regarding both CCD and TTT (p ≥ 0.827) allowing to mirror bone's morphology and geometry from the contralateral intact to the fractured femur. Outcomes in Part 2 resulted in an increased accuracy for the new determined rLWT threshold (50.5%) versus the standard 20.5 mm aLWT threshold, with sensitivity of 83.7% versus 82.7% and specificity 81.3% versus 77.8%, respectively.

The novel patient-specific rLWT measure can be based on the contralateral femur anatomy and is a more accurate predictor of a secondary lateral wall fracture in comparison to the conventional aLWT. This study established the threshold of 50.5% rLWT as a reference value for prediction of fracture stability and selection of an appropriate implant for fixation of trochanteric femoral fractures.

Screw fixation is an established method for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, although with a high rate of implant-related complications. An allograft system for implant fixation in ACL reconstruction, the Shark Screw ACL (surgebright GmbH) could overcome some of the shortcomings of bioabsorbable screws, such as foreign body reaction, need for implant removal and imaging artefacts. However, it needs to provide sufficient mechanical stability. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the biomechanical stability, especially graft slippage, of the novel allograft system versus a conventional bioabsorbable interference screw (BioComposite Interference Screw; Arthrex Inc.) for tibial implant fixation in ACL reconstruction.

Twenty-four paired human proximal tibiae (3 female, 9 male, 72.7 ± 5.6 years) underwent ACL reconstruction. The quadrupled semitendinosus and gracilis tendon graft were fixed in one specimen of each pair using the allograft fixation system Shak Screw ACL and the contralateral one using an interference screw. All specimens were cyclically loaded at 1 Hz with peak load levels monotonically increased from 50 N at a rate of 0.1 N/cycle until catastrophic failure. Relative movements of the graft versus the tibia were captured with a stereographic optical motion tracking system (Aramis SRX; GOM GmbH).

The two fixation methods did not demonstrate any statistical difference in ultimate load at graft slippage (p = 0.24) or estimated survival at slippage (p = 0.06). Both, the ultimate load and estimated survival until failure were higher in the interference screw (p = 0.04, and p = 0.018, respectively). Graft displacement at ultimate load reached values of up to 7.2 mm (interference screw) and 11.3 mm (Shark Screw ACL).

The allograft screw for implant fixation in ACL reconstruction showed similar behavior in terms of graft slippage compared to the conventional metal interference screw but underperformed in terms of ultimate load. However, the ultimate load may not be considered a direct indicator of clinical failure.

Aims

The traditional transosseus flexor hallucis longus (FHL) tendon transfer for patients with Achilles tendinopathy requires two incisions to harvest a long tendon graft. The use of a bio-tenodesis screw enables a short graft to be used and is less invasive, but lacks supporting evidence about its biomechanical behaviour. We aimed, in this study, to compare the strength of the traditional transosseus tendon-to-tendon fixation with tendon-to-bone fixation using a tenodesis screw, in cyclical loading and ultimate load testing.