Abstract
Background
Osteoporotic fracture fixation in the proximal humerus remains a critical challenge. While the biomechanical benefits of screw augmentation with bone cement are established, minimising the cement volume may help control any risk of extravasation and reduce surgical procedure time. Previous experimental studies suggest that it may be sufficient to only augment the screws at the sites of the lowest bone quality. However, adequately testing this hypothesis in vitro is not feasible.
Methods
This study systematically evaluated the 64 possible strategies for augmenting six screws in the humeral head through finite element simulations to determine the relative biomechanical benefits of each augmentation strategy. Two subjects with varying levels of local bone mineral density were each modeled with a 2-part and 3-part fracture that was stabilised with a PHILOS plate. The biomechanical fixation was evaluated under physiological loads (muscle and joint reaction forces) that correspond to three different motions: 45 degrees abduction, 45 degrees abduction with 45 degrees internal rotation, and 45 degrees flexion.
Results
The higher risk cases (low bone quality or 3-part fracture) exhibited greater peri-implant bone strains and derived greater benefits from screw augmentation. When selecting four screws to augment, the biomechanical benefits ranged from a 25% reduction in bone strain to a 59% reduction in bone strain, depending on the choice of screws. Further, the relative benefits of each augmentation strategy varied between patients and under different loading conditions. Correlations between local bone mineral density and benefits of augmentation were not significant.
Conclusions
An optimal augmentation strategy is likely patient-specific and a larger cohort, modeled under a variety of conditions, would be required to elucidate any patient-specific factors (e.g. morphology or bone quality) that may dictate the relative benefits of each augmentation strategy.
